# Land at 260A Hawkes Mill Lane, Allesley, Coventry

- **Decision:** allowed, 24 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: G Sibley
- **Authority:** Coventry (West Midlands)
- **Appeal reference:** 6009837
- **Application reference:** PL/2025/0001987/OUT
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Outline permission for two dwellings (access only) behind houses on Hawkes Mill Lane
- **Homes:** 2
- **Site context:** green-belt, settlement-edge
- **Green Belt:** yes (grey belt accepted)
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** GB7(1)(g), TR3
- **Development plan policies:** Coventry Local Plan 2017 GB1, H3, AC1, AC4, AC5
- **Main issues:** inappropriate development in Green Belt, sustainable location
- **Tags:** grey-belt-accepted, not-inappropriate, sustainable-location-pass, hdt-below-75, small-scheme, self-build-unsecured, bng-exemption-not-shown, parties-consulted-on-2026-framework

## Summary
Outline permission for two houses on a contained plot within a small group of houses at Hawkes End, Coventry Green Belt. Allowed: grey belt, unmet need via the published Housing Delivery Test (below 75%), and a sustainable location under TR3, so not inappropriate under GB7(1)(g). The location finding rests on a short description of a partly unlit footpath and "nearby" buses, with no distances or frequencies.

## Issues and findings
- **Transition.** "The main parties were given the opportunity to comment on the implications of the new Framework" (DL ¶2).
- **Grey belt: PASS.** "I therefore find that the site does not strongly contribute to purpose (a)" (DL ¶7), and likewise (b) and (d).
- **(g)(ii) via HDT: PASS.** "the HDT remains the published measure for the purposes of applying national policy at the time of this decision" (DL ¶9); "I find that there is an evidenced unmet need for the proposed dwellings" (DL ¶10).
- **(g)(iii) / TR3: PASS.** "Although the part of the route nearest to the site is not fully street lit, the route is lit for much of its length and would provide a walking route for future occupiers" (DL ¶12). "day-to-day travel would not be wholly dependent on the private car. The proposal would therefore accord with Policy TR3 of the Framework" (DL ¶13).
- **Self-build UU: defective and unnecessary.** "the undertaking lacks the clarity and precision required for an enforceable planning obligation" (DL ¶16).

## Planning balance
None. Not inappropriate and compliant with the development plan as a whole (DL ¶14, ¶31). S5(5) is not mentioned.

## What made the difference
The site's containment within an existing group of houses (grey belt) and a published HDT result the council could not displace. The TR3 finding is brief; compare Coventry 6011410 (same authority, same week).

## Transferable points
- The published HDT result governs fn41 until a new plan is adopted, even if the council questions the ONS figures behind it (DL ¶9–10).
- A contained plot within a group of houses behind a road frontage does not strongly contribute to purposes (a), (b) or (d) (DL ¶7).
- Weak authority on (g)(iii): the letter accepts "not be wholly dependent on the private car" without distances or bus frequencies (DL ¶12–13).
- An imprecise self-build UU is not relied on; the BNG condition then applies (DL ¶16–17).

## Policy findings
- **AnnexB:grey-belt: pass.** within small group of houses behind Hawkes Mill Lane frontage; no strong contribution to (a), (b) or (d) (DL 6-8)
- **GB7(1)(g)(i): pass.** would not fundamentally undermine purposes across plan area; letter also says no undermining of encroachment purpose (DL 8)
- **GB7(1)(g)(ii): pass.** fn41 via published HDT below 75% (figure not stated); council's challenge to ONS figures behind HDT rejected pending plan review adoption (DL 9-10)
- **GB7(1)(g)(iii): pass.** footpath to Allesley, not fully lit near the site but "lit for much of its length"; cycling practicable; "nearby bus services" to Coventry; no distances, times or bus frequencies stated; "not be wholly dependent on the private car" (DL 11-13)
- **TR3: pass.** TR3 paraphrased incl. rural practicability; accords (DL 11, 13)
- **DM6: neutral.** self-build UU imprecise (refers to "the Dwelling", "first occupier") and not necessary; not relied on; BNG condition applies as self-build exemption not secured (DL 15-19)

## Key facts
- Hawkes End has limited services; Allesley nearby with day-to-day needs (distance not stated) (DL 12)
- Published HDT result relied on; council argued emerging plan evidence questions the ONS figures (DL 9)
- Access via existing track between 244 and 248 Hawkes Mill Lane (DL 22)
- [object Object]
- Parties given the opportunity to comment on the 2026 Framework (DL 2)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6009837
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/d42c6b84-e004-45ff-8d15-3140c2719b45

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6009837.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.