# Cales Farm, Broadlands Drive, Malvern (200 dwellings, reserved matters)

- **Decision:** approved, 26 August 2026
- **Decided by:** Council planning committee: Malvern Hills Southern Area Planning Committee (6-5)
- **Authority:** Malvern Hills (West Midlands)
- **Application reference:** M/25/01235/RM
- **Procedure:** committee
- **Development:** Reserved matters (access, appearance, landscaping, layout, scale) for up to 200 dwellings under outline M/23/01777/OUT
- **Homes:** 200
- **Site context:** settlement-edge
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** N4(4), DP3, TR6(4)
- **Development plan policies:** South Worcestershire Development Plan Review 2026 SWDPR28, SWDPR31, SWDPR34
- **Main issues:** National Landscape setting, layout and landscape mitigation
- **Tags:** national-landscape, reserved-matters, update-sheet-code-mapping, drafting-slip, split-vote, officer-rec-followed

## Summary
Reserved matters for 200 Barratt homes at Cales Farm on the edge of Malvern, in views from the Malvern Hills National Landscape. The committee approved 6-5, in line with officers. The case is recorded mainly for how the switch to the new Framework was handled: a one-page update sheet converting paragraph numbers, which cited the wrong code for the Protected Landscape setting test.

## Issues and findings
- **Protected Landscape setting.** Update sheet: "References to The National Landscape in the NPPF are now encapsulated within… Policy N5 Para 4 which states: '4. Development proposals within the setting of Protected Landscapes should be sensitively located and designed to avoid or minimise adverse impacts on the Protected Landscape.'" (Update, item 7, ¶7.2.31 & 7.2.33). The quoted text is **N4(4)**. N5 is "Maintaining the character of the coast". The same evening's update for the Pendock solar item cited it correctly as N4 4.
- **Framework change.** "Although the relevant references in the NPPF have been updated there are no significant changes in the NPPF policies relevant to consideration of this application for Reserved Matters which would lead your officers to change their recommendation" (Update, item 7).

## Planning balance
This was a reserved-matters balance. Layout, landscape mitigation and phasing were set against residual landscape impact seen from the Hills, with the principle already fixed by the outline.

## What made the difference
The outline permission settled the principle. The narrow 6-5 vote shows members' unease about views from the Hills, but a reserved-matters refusal would have needed a detailed-design reason.

## Transferable points
- Check the code in an officer's update sheet against the Framework text. Here the setting test was attributed to N5(4) when it is N4(4).
- "No significant changes" is the standard officer line for reserved matters decided in the first weeks after publication.

## Policy findings
- **N4(4): pass.** in the setting of the Malvern Hills National Landscape (about 290 m to the west), with elevated views from the Hills; the update sheet mis-cites the setting policy as "Policy N5 Para 4" (N5 is the coast policy)
- **DP3: pass.** update sheet maps old ¶¶131/135 to DP3 with no change to the conclusion
- **TR6(4): pass.** old ¶116 mapped to TR6(4); no severe impact

## Key facts
- Barratt West Midlands reserved matters for up to 200 homes; outline already granted
- The site is visible in elevated views from the Malvern Hills National Landscape about 290 m away; ward member referral
- The report was drafted pre-August; the update sheet converted paragraph references and said there were "no significant changes in the NPPF policies relevant to consideration of this application for Reserved Matters"
- Approved 6-5 in line with the officer recommendation

## Sources
- https://moderngov.malvernhills.gov.uk/documents/s40169/Committee%20Report_M2501235RM.pdf
- https://moderngov.malvernhills.gov.uk/documents/b9114/Update%20Reports%2026th-Aug-2026%2018.00%20Southern%20Area%20Planning%20Committee.pdf?T=9
- https://moderngov.malvernhills.gov.uk/documents/g3478/Printed%20minutes%2026th-Aug-2026%2018.00%20Southern%20Area%20Planning%20Committee.pdf?T=1

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/malvern-M-25-01235-RM.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the officer report. 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.