Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed30 January 20263373785

Land at Manor Cottages, Carthouse Lane, Woking, Surrey

Planning appeal 3373785 at Land at Manor Cottages, Carthouse Lane, Woking, Surrey (Woking Borough Council) was dismissed on 30 January 2026 by Inspector Gardner L, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the appeal site is grey belt land and whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and relevant development plan policies, including the effect upon the openness of the Green Belt.

the demolition of 3 existing barns and the erection of 4 dwellings. Alongside this, a conversion of 1 existing barn to create a further dwelling (total of 5 dwellings)

Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector
Gardner L
Postcode
GU21 4XT

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • whether the appeal site is grey belt land and whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and relevant development plan policies, including the effect upon the openness of the Green Belt
  • whether the site is suitable for the proposed development, having regard to relevant policies for the location of housing and the proximity to services and facilities
  • the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area
  • whether the proposal would have an acceptable effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of 5 Manor Cottages, with particular regard to outlook
  • the effect of the development on protected species, in particular bats
  • 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 development

What decided it

The substantial weight given to Green Belt harm by reason of inappropriateness, together with significant weight given to harm to character and appearance, neighbouring living conditions, and uncertainty regarding protected species impacts, were not clearly outweighed by the moderate weight of other considerations including housing delivery and economic benefits.

The substantial weight to be given to Green Belt harm by reason of inappropriateness, together with the significant weight given to other harms identified (unsuitable location, harm to character and appearance, harm to neighbouring outlook, and uncertainty regarding protected species), were not clearly outweighed by other considerations which carried moderate weight, therefore very special circumstances did not exist.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Policy CS6Policy CS1Policy CS18Policy CS21Policy CS24Policy CS7Policy DM13
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 11Paragraph 143Paragraph 153Paragraph 154Paragraph 155
Judgments
Lee Valley Regional Park Authority, R (on the application of) v Epping Forest District Council & Anor (Rev 1) [2016] EWCA Civ 404; R (on the application of Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster) and others) (Respondents) v North Yorkshire County Council (Appellant) [2020] UKSC 3; Mansell v Tonbridge and Malling BC & others [2017] EWCA Civ 1314; Gambone v SSCLG [2014] EWHC 952 (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 applied

The 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

106 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision
An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter
Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.
Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app
Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.
Start your free trial

More decisions in Woking Borough Council

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2026

  1. Dismissed19 October 20266006780
    East House, Chobham Road, Woking, GU21 2TU
  2. Dismissed17 April 20266005476
    2 Carters Lane Cottages, Carters Lane, Old Woking, Surrey, GU22 8JQ
  3. Dismissed7 October 20253363996
    Runtley Wood Farm Runtley Wood Lane, Sutton Green, Guildford, GU4 7QQ
  4. Dismissed30 September 20253357904
    Hoe Bridge School, 224 Old Woking Road, Woking, GU22 8JE
  5. Dismissed29 August 20253367606
    Cernunnos , Hermitage Bridge, Woking, Surrey, GU21 8XP

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.