Planning appeal decision
The Cedars, Towers Lane, Alvanley, Frodsham, Cheshire, WA6 0LG
Planning appeal 3349074 at The Cedars, Towers Lane, Alvanley, Frodsham, Cheshire, WA6 0LG (Cheshire West and Chester) was dismissed on 22 July 2026 by Inspector Jones D, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the development is inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and any other relevant development plan policies.
the erection of a two -storey dwelling house
- Authority
- Cheshire West and Chester
- Appeal type
- minor · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Jones D
- Postcode
- WA6 0LG
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the development is inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and any other relevant development plan policies
- whether the appeal site is in a suitable location for new housing
- whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, 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 substantial harm to Green Belt openness and inappropriateness of the development, combined with the unsuitability of the location and absence of demonstrated essential need for a rural worker dwelling, meant that very special circumstances did not exist to justify the development.
The substantial harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and erosion of openness, together with harm from the unsuitable location, was not clearly outweighed by other considerations which carried only little weight, so very special circumstances did not exist.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy STRAT9Policy STRAT1Policy STRAT2Policy STRAT8Policy DM21Policy DM19Policy DM25
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 142Paragraph 153Paragraph 154Paragraph 155Paragraph 84
- Judgments
- Oates v SSCLG & Canterbury CC [2017] EWHC 2716 (Admin), [2018] EWCA Civ 2229, [2019] JPL 251; Iddenden v Secretary of State for the Environment [1972] 1 W.L.R 1433; Hancock v SSCLG & Windsor & Maidenhead RBC [2012] EWHC 3704 (Admin)
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 Cheshire West and Chester
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2026
- Dismissed21 October 20266013998Holly Cottage, Post Office Lane, Norley, WA6 8NB
- Dismissed16 October 20266012737Smoker Brook Barn, Linnards Lane, Wincham, CW9 6ED
- Dismissed6 October 20266011029Oaktree, Liverpool Road, Neston, CH64 3RQ
- Dismissed10 September 20266005497Manor House Farm, Hillfoot Lane, Kingsley, Frodsham, WA6 6TB
- Dismissed10 September 20266005495Manor House Farm, Hillfoot Lane, Kingsley, Frodsham, WA6 6TB
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.
®