- Decision
- allowed, 17 August 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: Andrew Phillips
- Authority
- Hertsmere (East of England)
- Appeal reference
- 6008668
- Application reference
- 25/1719/FUL
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- Demolition of stables and erection of a two-bedroom bungalow with widened grasscrete access
- Homes
- 1
- Site context
- green belt, PDL, open countryside
- Green Belt
- Yes (grey belt not argued)
- Framework applied
- December 2024 NPPF (transitional)
- Determinative policies
- GB7(1)(e), S3
- Development plan policies
- Hertsmere Core Strategy 2013 CS13, SP1, CS22, SADM 2016 SADM11, SADM26, SADM30, Shenley Plan 2021 SH1
- Main issues
- inappropriate development; openness and purposes; character and appearance
Summary
Replacement of a stable block with a bungalow in the Hertsmere Green Belt. Allowed. The decision is dated 17 August 2026, the day the new Framework took effect, but it was reasoned entirely under the December 2024 Framework. It is included as a transitional marker. The stables and access were treated as previously developed land (2024 ¶154(g), now GB7(1)(e)) with no substantial harm to openness, so the scheme was not inappropriate, and the ¶11(d) tilted balance favoured one dwelling.
Issues and findings
- Transition. The letter does not mention the 2026 Framework. The main issues refer to "the National Planning Policy Framework 2024" (DL ¶6).
- PDL, 2024 ¶154(g) → GB7(1)(e): PASS. "the field that the site crosses … is more likely to have been used for the keeping of horses for recreational purposes than it has for agriculture … The hard landscaping of a new driveway is ancillary development to the creation of a new dwelling" (DL ¶11). "Given that the proposal would not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt … there is no requirement to assess the proposal under paragraph 155 of the Framework that includes if the site is in a sustainable location" (DL ¶15).
- Character: limited harm (DL ¶14, ¶17-18).
- Tilted balance (2024 ¶11(d)). "Given the limited harm to the rural appearance of the area and that there is a significant lack in the five year supply of housing land, the benefits clearly outweigh the harm" (DL ¶25).
Planning balance
Plan-led s38(6) with the ¶11(d) tilted balance as a material consideration. Limited character harm against one dwelling, a lack of five-year supply, and limited economic and rural-vitality benefits (DL ¶22-25).
What made the difference
Stables for recreational horses counted as PDL, so the redevelopment exception applied and the grey belt sustainable-location limb was never reached. Under the 2026 Framework the same route is GB7(1)(e), which includes "a material change of use to residential", and it has no sustainable-location limb either. The outcome would probably be the same, but the balance would now be S5/S3 "substantially outweighed" rather than ¶11(d).
Transferable points
- The PDL route in GB7(1)(e) (2024 ¶154(g)) avoids the grey belt sustainable-location test altogether (DL ¶15, ¶19).
- Access tracks across horse paddocks can be treated as part of the PDL, or as ancillary to it (DL ¶11).
- A decision dated 17 Aug 2026 may still apply the 2024 Framework without consultation. Check the date the letter was written against the date of publication.
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| GB7(1)(e) | pass | decided under 2024 para 154(g) (now GB7(1)(e)); stables are PDL; access across horse-grazing field treated as PDL/ancillary; no substantial harm to openness (DL 9-15) | |
| GB7(1)(g) | not-engaged | 2024 para 155 (incl. sustainable location) not assessed because 154(g) met (DL 15, 19) | |
| GB6(2) | not-engaged | not inappropriate, so no VSC balance | |
| DP3 | harm | limited | grasscrete access has some urbanising effect; limited harm to rural character; LP and NP conflict (DL 14, 17-18) |
| S3 | pass | 2024 para 11(d) tilted balance applied (no 5YHLS); benefits of one dwelling "clearly outweigh" limited harm (DL 22-25) |
Key facts
- Decision issued on the Framework's publication day (17 Aug 2026) but reasoned wholly under the December 2024 Framework (paras 142, 154(g), 155, 11(d))
- Stables approved 2000 (TP/2000/0451); Council accepted the stables were PDL
- Council cannot show 5YHLS (figure not stated)
- Sustainable location raised but not a reason for refusal and not assessed; site already visited regularly to tend horses (DL 19)
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.