# Land adjacent 10 Wren Avenue, Sproston, Crewe (PIP one self-build dwelling) - **Decision:** dismissed, 28 September 2026 - **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: Andrew Fulford - **Authority:** Cheshire West and Chester (North West) - **Appeal reference:** 6010642 - **Application reference:** 25/02664/PIP - **Procedure:** written-representations - **Development:** Permission in principle for one self-build dwelling on garden land at the corner of Wren Avenue and Brereton Lane, outside any settlement - **Homes:** 1 - **Site context:** open-countryside, rural-lane - **Green Belt:** no - **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF - **Determinative policies:** S5(1)(j)(i), S5(4), TR3 - **Development plan policies:** Cheshire West and Chester Local Plan Part One 2015 STRAT 1, STRAT 2, STRAT 9, Local Plan Part Two 2019 DM 19, R 1 - **Main issues:** suitable location and accessibility - **Tags:** PIP, s5-1-j, s5-4-exceptional, sustainable-location-fail, rural-lane-no-footway, self-build, small-scheme, housing-shortfall, parties-consulted-on-2026-framework ## Summary Permission in principle for one self-build dwelling beside a small cul-de-sac of semis at Sproston, between Middlewich and Holmes Chapel. The site is 2 km from either town, so S5(1)(j)(i) failed. An hourly bus stops 400 m away, but reaching it means walking in the carriageway of an unrestricted lane and crossing the A54 with no formal crossing. The inspector gave significant weight to the TR3 conflict, and under S5(4) the limited benefits did not substantially outweigh it. Dismissed. ## Issues and findings - **Transition.** "parties have been provided with an opportunity to make further submissions" (DL ¶6). - **Bus route.** "Whilst the bus stop is within an acceptable walking distance, the first part of the route requires walking within the road along Brereton Lane given the lack of a pavement or grass verge" (DL ¶13). "this route would not be a realistic option for many future occupiers especially a parent with young children or those with mobility issues" (DL ¶13). - **Cycling.** "the routes include sections of unlit road where vehicles can travel at 40mph. This would be unattractive to all but the most confident cyclists" (DL ¶15). - **Not isolated is not the test.** "the presence of other nearby dwellings does not overcome the concerns raised over the unsustainability of the location" (DL ¶17). - **S5(1)(j)(i): FAIL.** "The development would thus not be physically well-related to any existing settlements" (DL ¶24). - **TR3: FAIL.** "The site is not located where it can support sustainable patterns of movement and would not enable good accessibility for different users and would therefore be contrary to Policy TR3 of the Framework. Significant weight is attached to this conflict" (DL ¶27). ## Planning balance S5(4) exceptional circumstances: housing, self-build and economic benefits (limited) against the TR3 conflict (significant). "The benefits would therefore not substantially outweigh the identified adverse effects" (DL ¶27). ## What made the difference The walk to the bus: short, but in the road on an unrestricted lane and across the A54 with no crossing. Proximity to a bus stop did not make the location accessible. ## Transferable points - A bus stop "within an acceptable walking distance" does not help where the route means walking in the carriageway and crossing an A road informally (DL ¶13). - TR3 is tested for all users, including a parent with young children or people with mobility issues (DL ¶13). - Not being isolated does not answer the TR3 question (DL ¶17). - A TR3 conflict can carry significant weight in the S5(4) balance for one dwelling (DL ¶27). ## Policy findings - **S5(1)(j)(i): fail.** about 2 km from Middlewich and Holmes Chapel, not physically well related to any settlement (DL 24) - **S5(4): fail.** benefits limited; do not substantially outweigh adverse effects (DL 25-27) - **TR3: fail (significant weight).** 400 m to an hourly bus, but first part walked in the carriageway of an unrestricted lane with no verge, then an uncontrolled crossing of the A54; cycling on unlit 40 mph roads; only a pub within walking distance (DL 12-16, 27) - **HO7: benefit (limited weight).** one self-build dwelling; self-build modest weight (DL 19, 26) ## Key facts - Brereton Lane has no footway or verge and no speed restriction (up to 60 mph) (DL 12) - Bus stop about 400 m on Holmes Chapel Road (A54), D&G route 42 hourly between Holmes Chapel and Middlewich; no formal crossing (DL 13) - Middlewich and Holmes Chapel about 2 km; routes include unlit 40 mph sections (DL 15) - Not isolated (cul-de-sac of five pairs of semis) but this does not answer the accessibility issue (DL 17) - Council cannot demonstrate a five-year supply (figure not stated) (DL 24) - Parties given an opportunity to comment on the 17 Aug 2026 Framework (DL 6) ## Sources - https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6010642 - https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/23aa00a1-a266-4f18-a472-aa52098db09e --- Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6010642.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.