- Decision
- dismissed, 4 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: A Wright
- Authority
- Tandridge (South East)
- Appeal reference
- 6010313
- Application reference
- TA/2025/1413
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- Conversion of agricultural building to five dwellings with parking and landscaping
- Homes
- 5
- Site context
- green belt, open countryside, rural lane, listed building setting
- Green Belt
- Yes (grey belt accepted)
- Housing land supply
- 1.97 years
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- GB7(1)(g)(iii), TR3, GB6(2), HE6
- Development plan policies
- Tandridge Local Plan Part 2 2014 DP7, DP10, DP13, DP20, Tandridge Core Strategy 2008 CSP18, CSP21
- Main issues
- grey belt; sustainable location; openness; heritage; character; living conditions; VSC balance
Summary
Conversion of a barn complex to five dwellings in the Tandridge Green Belt, where supply is 1.97 years. Grey belt and unmet need were accepted, but GB7(1)(g)(iii) failed: the site is on a 40 mph lane with no footways or lighting, away from settlements and buses. As inappropriate development causing openness, heritage (Grade II setting), character and amenity harm, it did not show VSC even with an acute shortfall. Dismissed.
Issues and findings
- Transition. Parties invited to comment; none received; "My decision reflects the latest version of the Framework" (DL ¶5).
- GB7(1)(b): PASS (for the building). "the proposal would meet the exception in Policy GB7(1)(b) of the Framework" (DL ¶9). Unreconciled tension: the letter goes on to test (g) and concludes the proposal "would therefore be inappropriate development" (DL ¶14) without explaining why the (b) finding does not settle appropriateness. The likely reading is that the subdivided curtilages, parking and open land adjoining the driveway fall outside a simple re-use. Rely on the (g)(iii) reasoning, not on the overall appropriateness logic.
- Grey belt: PASS (DL ¶10). (g)(ii): PASS. "there is an evidenced unmet need for the type of development proposed under criterion (ii)" (DL ¶11).
- GB7(1)(g)(iii) / TR3: FAIL. "The proposed development would introduce five dwellings into an area with very few residential properties. Residents, their visitors, service and delivery vehicles … would generate a significant amount of movement in this context" (DL ¶13). "It lies on Brickhouse Lane which is subject to a 40 mile per hour speed limit and lacks footways and streetlighting … future occupiers … would be heavily reliant on private vehicles to access services, and the location would not offer them a genuine choice of transport modes" (DL ¶14).
- Openness: demonstrable loss, visual and spatial, from subdivision and domestic paraphernalia (DL ¶17–18).
- HE6: moderate harm to the Grade II farmhouse setting. "given the relatively modest scale of the public benefits, these would not outweigh the harm" (DL ¶23).
- Character and amenity: harm (DL ¶26–27, ¶32).
- Neutral factors. "the absence of harm would be a neutral matter which would not carry weight in favour of the scheme" (DL ¶36).
Planning balance
GB6(2) VSC. Substantial weight to Green Belt harm, plus openness, heritage, character and living-conditions harm. On the other side: five homes and social/economic benefits (moderate at DL ¶33, "modest" at DL ¶38), and a fallback of limited weight. "the other considerations would not clearly outweigh the harm" (DL ¶38).
What made the difference
Location. The site is isolated from settlements and buses, on an unlit 40 mph lane with no footway, which failed limb (iii) and made the scheme inappropriate. Heritage harm independently failed HE6. Even an acute 1.97-year supply only earned moderate weight for five homes. A site adjoining a settlement with a footway, or a scheme confined to the LDC fallback footprint, might have succeeded.
Transferable points
- Five dwellings can "generate a significant amount of movement in this context" where the area has very few homes. TR3(1)(a) is relative to context (DL ¶13).
- A 40 mph lane without footways or lighting, away from bus services, means no "genuine choice of transport modes" (DL ¶14).
- An acute supply shortfall satisfies (g)(ii) but does not overcome a (g)(iii) failure, and five homes attract only moderate or modest weight (DL ¶11, ¶33, ¶38).
- An absence of harm on technical matters (highways etc.) is neutral, not a benefit (DL ¶36).
- For a five-home scheme, HE6 moderate setting harm outweighs "relatively modest" public benefits (DL ¶23).
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)(b) | pass | re-use of permanent and substantial building, no increase in size (DL 9); not reconciled with the later finding that the scheme is inappropriate (DL 14), presumably because curtilages and open land go beyond the building | |
| AnnexB:grey-belt | pass | undisputed; does not strongly contribute to (a), (b), (d) (DL 10) | |
| GB7(1)(g)(ii) | pass | 1.97-year supply, shortfall over 3,000 homes = evidenced unmet need (DL 11) | |
| GB7(1)(g)(iii) | fail | five dwellings in an area with very few homes = significant movement "in this context"; rural, away from settlements, facilities and buses; 40 mph lane without footways or lighting (DL 12-14) | |
| TR3 | fail | no genuine choice of transport modes (DL 12, 14) | |
| GB6(2) | fail | substantial | inappropriate; demonstrable loss of openness from curtilages and paraphernalia; VSC not shown (DL 17-18, 37-38) |
| HE6 | harm | moderate harm to setting of Grade II 16th C Branford Wells farmhouse; modest public benefits do not outweigh (DL 21-24) | |
| DP3 | harm | cluster of five terraced dwellings at odds with scattered pattern; also poor amenity space for plots 1-4 (DL 26-27, 30-32) | |
| HO7 | benefit | moderate | moderate weight at DL 33, "modest" weight in the VSC balance at DL 38 |
Key facts
- Tandridge supply 1.97 years; shortfall over 3,000 homes, described as "persistent, chronic and extremely serious" (Nutfield appeal APP/M3645/W/25/3374913)
- Brickhouse Lane 40 mph, no footways, no street lighting; site "away from settlements, facilities and bus services"
- Class Q-type LDC fallback (2021) for five dwellings with less land; given limited weight (DL 34-35)
- Previous five-dwelling scheme dismissed (APP/M3645/W/22/3296968)
- Absence of harm on highways, trees, biodiversity etc. is neutral (DL 36)
Related decisions
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.