®Planning appeal decision
Land Lying to South West of Tilthams Corner Road, (Known as The Loseley), Godalming, Surrey, GU5 0BT
Without planning permission, the material change of use of the land for residential purposes, through the siting of caravans and associated unauthorised operational development, including building and engineering operations comprising buildings, installation of cesspit / septic tanks and drainage works, the creation of an access and the laying of material to create a hardsurface
- Authority
- Guildford Borough Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Minor traveller and caravan pitches
- Inspector
- Graham J
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The implications of the fact that the Appeal Site is located within the Green Belt
- The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area
- The effect of the development on the safety and function of the local road network
- Whether the Appeal Site is a "sustainable location" for the development
- The need for, and supply of, Gypsy and Traveller pitches
- The personal circumstances of the Appellants and other occupiers of the Appeal Site, and the best interests of any children involved
What decided it
The significant and substantial harm to the character and appearance of the area and the setting of the Surrey Hills National Landscape, found to constitute a strong reason for refusal under NPPF paragraph 189, which disapplied the tilted balance and was not outweighed by the benefits of meeting unmet Gypsy and Traveller need.
The substantial harm from inappropriate development in the Green Belt (including harm to openness and Green Belt purposes) combined with the significant/substantial harm to the character and appearance of the area and SHNL setting, plus limited weight against the intentional unauthorised development, outweighed the considerable weight attached to the unmet need for pitches, lack of five-year supply, absence of alternative sites, personal circumstances and best interests of the children, so planning permission was refused.
Framework references: 153, 160, 154, 155, 189, 110, 115, 116, 11, 142, 143, 187, 191
Plan policies cited: Policy P1, Policy D1, Policy D4, Policy ID3, Policy P2, Policy P7(1)
Judgments cited: Quarry Mews Ltd v SSHCLG & Oxford CC [2025] EWHC 1968 (Admin)
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.