Planning appeal decision
Salon 227 227 Coppermill Road, Wraysbury, Staines, TW19 5NW
Planning appeal 6002014 at Salon 227 227 Coppermill Road, Wraysbury, Staines, TW19 5NW (Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead) was dismissed on 10 March 2026 by Inspector O'Neill A, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt for the purposes of the development plan and the National Planning Policy Framework including the effect upon the openness of the Green Belt.
the change of use of ground floor from Class E (hairdressers) to sui generis (car sales)
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- retail · Change of use
- Inspector
- O'Neill A
- Postcode
- TW19 5NW
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt for the purposes of the development plan and the National Planning Policy Framework including the effect upon the openness of the Green Belt
- the effect of the proposal on the character of the area
- whether the proposal meets the day to day requirements or provides additional benefits to the local community
- whether the proposal increases the risk of flooding
- the effect of the proposal on the safety of highway users
- the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, with particular regard to noise, disturbance and pollution
- if inappropriate, whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, are clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal
What decided it
The proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt that harms openness and countryside safeguarding purposes, and the moderate economic benefits do not clearly outweigh this substantial harm plus other identified harms to character, community facilities, highway safety, flood risk, and neighbouring living conditions.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- SP1QP5NP/HOU4QP1QP3NP/HOU1NP/OE1TR7ED3NR1NP/SUSTDEV 02IF2EP1EP2EP4
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 154Paragraph 155Paragraph 181Paragraph 116Paragraph 153
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 Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2026
- Allowed27 October 20266007126Grove Park Industrial Estate Waltham Road, White Waltham, Maidenhead, SL6 3JF
- Dismissed21 October 20266009694Land Adjacent to Stud Green Farm, Sturt Green, Holyport, SL62JH
- Allowed7 September 20266008689Primrose Farm, Bradcutts Lane, Cookham Dean, Maidenhead, SL6 9TL
- Dismissed4 September 202660092602 Island Cottages Stanwell Road, Horton, SL3 9PQ
- Notice upheld10 August 20263369085Land to the Side of 16 Halfway Houses, Maidenhead Road, Maidenhead, Berkshire, SL6 6PP
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.
®