Planning appeal decision
Little Pantiles, Surrey, GU5 9QF
erection of a self-build dwelling following demolition of ancillary cottage, garage and workshop and removal of in-ground pool
- Authority
- Guildford Borough Council
- Appeal type
- Planning
- Procedure
- Written
- Development
- residential
- Postcode
- GU5 9QF
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 2024 and any relevant development plan policies including the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt
- The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area including with regard to the Surrey Hills National Landscape
- Whether the development would promote sustainable transport modes
- The quality of living conditions for future occupiers with particular regard to outlook
- The effect of the proposed development on biodiversity with particular regard to trees
- 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 proposal
What decided it
The substantial harm to Green Belt openness and the serious harm to the character and appearance of the nationally important Surrey Hills National Landscape, combined with unacceptable living conditions, unsustainable transport patterns, and biodiversity harm, are not clearly outweighed by the modest benefits of housing delivery and self-build provision, such that very special circumstances do not exist.
The substantial and serious harms to the Green Belt, openness, and National Landscape character, together with unacceptable living conditions, unsustainable transport, and biodiversity harm, are not clearly outweighed by the modest benefits of housing delivery and self-build provision; the tilted balance under paragraph 11(d) does not apply because Green Belt and National Landscape policies provide a strong reason for refusal under footnote 7.
Framework references: 154, 11, 7
Plan policies cited: Policy P2, Policy P1, Policy ID3, Policy D5, Policy D4, Policy P6
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.
®