Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed17 October 20253368225

Maesbury The Runnell, NESTON, CH64 3TG

a double storey front extension, single storey rear and side extension and raising of central roof

Authority
Cheshire West and Chester
Appeal type
householder · Householder (HAS)
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Householder developments
Inspector
Winnard K

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the proposal 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 proposal on the openness of the Green Belt
  • Its effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and area
  • The effect of the proposal on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties by reference to privacy
  • If the proposal would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, would be clearly outweighed by other considerations to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the proposal

What decided it

The proposal would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt by reason of disproportionate additions to the original building, and the harm to the Green Belt was not clearly outweighed by the limited weight given to the health and wellbeing benefits claimed.

Framework references: 154

Plan policies cited: STRAT9, DM21, ENV6, DM3, SOC5, DM2

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.