- Decision
- refused, 14 September 2026
- Decided by
- Council officer (delegated): Malvern Hills DC case officer (delegated)
- Authority
- Malvern Hills (West Midlands)
- Application reference
- M/26/01162/PIP
- Procedure
- delegated
- Development
- Permission in principle for 5 to 9 dwellings on a 0.78 ha roadside field
- Homes
- 9
- Site context
- open countryside, settlement edge, listed building setting
- Green Belt
- No
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- S5(1)(e), S5(4), AnnexB:settlement
- Development plan policies
- South Worcestershire Development Plan Review 2026 SWDPR03, SWDPR06, SWDPR16, SWDPR28, SWDPR34, Powick NP 2025-2041 (consultation draft)
- Main issues
- S5 infill; settlement edge; character; spatial strategy
Summary
PIP for up to nine homes on a field across Upton Road from the Callow End development boundary. The officer accepted that the location is accessible (Category 1 village) but held that the site is not limited infilling within a group of houses under S5(1)(e). It "would extend the limits of the village", so no S5 category was met. The application was refused under delegated powers.
Issues and findings
- S5(1)(e): FAIL. "the different locations are defined at this point by the main road where built form predominates on the eastern side of the road, while to the west it is the rural aspects of the surrounding countryside that clearly prevail … the proposal does represent a standalone extension of residential built form into the open countryside … The proposal would not amount to 'rounding off' the settlement but would extend the limits of the village … Policy S5:1(e) of the Framework does not support the proposal" (Report, Location).
- Accessibility: PASS. "The location in terms of its sustainability is essentially well place for most key services and facilities provided in Callow End … future residents would arguably have a 'choice' and as such SWDPR 06 would be addressed" (Location).
Planning balance
Plan-led: conflict with SWDPR03 and SWDPR34, with no S5 category to set against it. Accessibility did not overcome the spatial-strategy conflict.
What made the difference
The road as a settlement edge. Built form on one side and open countryside on the other meant the site read as countryside, however close it was to the boundary.
Transferable points
- A road can mark the settlement edge for S5 purposes. Land on the countryside side is not infill even when it directly faces the village.
- Good accessibility (TR3) does not create an S5 category. See also wychavon-W-26-01322-OUT.
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| S5(1)(e) | fail | the site is across the road from the village boundary; countryside prevails on its side of Upton Road; "a standalone extension of residential built form into the open countryside", not infill and not "rounding off" | |
| TR3 | pass | Callow End is a Category 1 village with services and public transport within walking and cycling distance; residents "would arguably have a 'choice'" | |
| SWDPR03 / SWDPR34 | conflict | open countryside; roadside hedgerow and verdant frontage; spatial strategy conflict |
Key facts
- The site is on the west side of Upton Road; the development boundary follows the east side of the road
- An earlier 9-dwelling outline on the site was refused in 2016 (15/01392/OUT)
- The applicant submitted a review challenging the South Worcestershire five-year supply; objectors pointed to the Council's five-year supply; the report excerpt read does not set out a supply figure
- A Grade II listed building (Glebe Cottage) is to the north
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.