- Decision
- approved, 4 September 2026
- Decided by
- Council officer (delegated): Bromsgrove DC (delegated; notice signed by the Assistant Director)
- Authority
- Bromsgrove (West Midlands)
- Application reference
- 25/00751/FUL
- Procedure
- delegated
- Development
- Change of use from agriculture to mixed education/agriculture (SEND/AP for up to 36 pupils), temporary rural worker's dwelling, agricultural barn, three learning buildings, polytunnels, pods, containers, track and car park (part retrospective)
- Homes
- 1
- Site context
- green belt, open countryside, rural lane
- Green Belt
- Yes (grey belt accepted)
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- GB7(1)(g)(i), GB7(1)(g)(ii), GB7(1)(g)(iii), TR3
- Development plan policies
- Bromsgrove District Plan 2017 BDP1, BDP2, BDP4, BDP15, BDP19, BDP21, Bromsgrove High Quality Design SPD
- Main issues
- grey belt for non-housing use; evidenced need for SEND; sustainable location for rural-dependent use; rural worker dwelling
Summary
A farm-based SEND school, with a temporary rural worker's cabin, barn, learning pods and polytunnels, on open Green Belt farmland near Hopwood. The officer used the GB7(1)(g) grey belt route for a non-housing use. Need was accepted on the applicant's uncontested evidence. GB7(1)(g)(iii) was passed although the site is car-dependent, because the Highway Authority accepted that the specialist use needs a rural setting and the minibus hub arrangement reduces trips. Permission was granted under delegated powers.
Issues and findings
- Need, GB7(1)(g)(ii): PASS. "The Local Planning Authority has not undertaken an independent assessment of educational need … However, there is no substantive evidence before the Council that contradicts the applicant's assessment … a demonstrable need for the proposed educational facility has been established" (Notice p.12).
- Location, GB7(1)(g)(iii): PASS on the nature of the development. "Whilst acknowledging that the site is located in the countryside and would primarily be accessed by private vehicle and dedicated minibus transport, the Highway Authority accepts that the specialist educational and therapeutic nature of the development necessitates a rural agricultural setting and concludes that refusal on locational sustainability grounds would not be justified" (p.12). "The Highway Authority acknowledges that the proposal would generate relatively few opportunities for sustainable travel and would be predominantly car-based" (p.13).
- Grey belt, GB7(1)(g)(i): PASS. "whilst the land makes some contribution towards checking unrestricted sprawl, it does not strongly contribute to Purpose (a), makes only a limited contribution to Purpose (b) and makes no contribution to Purpose (d). The site is therefore considered to constitute Grey Belt" (p.13).
- Rural worker dwelling. "Officers are therefore satisfied that the proposal demonstrates both a functional and financial justification for temporary onsite accommodation" (p.10).
Planning balance
The officer found the scheme not inappropriate, then still ran a weighing exercise. "Moderate weight is afforded to the limited harm to openness", set against significant weight to the verified rural worker need, the viable farm enterprise, rural diversification, SEND provision and therapeutic learning. "officers conclude that the balance falls clearly in favour of the proposal" (p.14).
What made the difference
TR3(1)(a) allows sustainable-location requirements to give way "unless the nature of the development would make this impractical". A statutory highway authority accepted that a therapeutic farm school cannot be in a town. That, with the minibus hub, carried GB7(1)(g)(iii). An ordinary market housing scheme on the same site would have failed that limb.
Transferable points
- GB7(1)(g)(iii) can be passed for a car-based site where the nature of the use genuinely requires a rural location (compare TR3(1)(a) "unless the nature of the development would make this impractical"). This does not carry over to general housing.
- "Evidenced unmet need" (GB7(1)(g)(ii)) for non-housing uses was accepted on the applicant's evidence alone, with no independent assessment, because nothing contradicted it.
- Doctrinal wobble: having found the scheme not inappropriate under GB7, the officer still gave "moderate weight" to openness harm and balanced it. Under GB7(1) such development "should not be regarded as harmful to the Green Belt".
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)(g)(i) | pass | not PDL, but it "does not strongly contribute to Purpose (a)" (about 1.6 km east of Hopwood, not adjoining an urban edge), with a limited contribution to (b) and none to (d); some conflict with (c) | |
| GB7(1)(g)(ii) | pass | need for specialist SEND provision accepted on the applicant's evidence; the LPA "has not undertaken an independent assessment" but has no contrary evidence | |
| GB7(1)(g)(iii) | pass | accepted although the site is car-based. The Highway Authority says the use "necessitates a rural agricultural setting", and remote drop-off hubs with a minibus shuttle mitigate trips. | |
| HO11 | pass | functional and financial need for a temporary rural worker's dwelling (278 standard man days; about £25k net profit by year 3), independently verified by Kernon Countryside |
Key facts
- About 2.32 ha about 1.6 km east of Hopwood and 1 km north of the M42 Hopwood Park interchange; open fields all round
- SEND and alternative provision for up to 36 pupils aged 6 to 18, 9am to 3pm in term time; alpacas, pigs, bees and polytunnel crops
- Remote parking and drop-off hubs at two nearby sports clubs, with a minibus shuttle; eight on-site spaces
- National Highways' objection withdrawn; Worcestershire Highways no objection subject to a Travel Plan
- Alvechurch Parish Council objected on Green Belt precedent
- Having found the scheme not inappropriate, the officer still weighed "moderate weight … to the limited harm to openness" against "substantial public benefits"
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.