# Land at OS 9294 4914, Stonebow Road, Drakes Broughton (50 dwellings) - **Decision:** refused, 2 September 2026 - **Decided by:** Council officer (delegated): Jack Hanly (case officer); authorised Clare Bull - **Authority:** Wychavon (West Midlands) - **Application reference:** W/26/01322/OUT - **Procedure:** delegated - **Development:** Outline, access only, for 50 dwellings including 20 affordable - **Homes:** 50 - **Site context:** open-countryside, settlement-edge - **Green Belt:** no - **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF - **Determinative policies:** S3(1)(a), S5(1)(j), S5(4), DP3(3), TR3, TR6(4), N2 - **Development plan policies:** South Worcestershire Development Plan Review 2026 SWDPR01, SWDPR03, SWDPR05, SWDPR06, SWDPR10, SWDPR28, SWDPR30, SWDPR34, Drakes Broughton and Wadborough with Pirton NP 2017 DBWP1, DBWP3, Wychavon Design Code SPD 2026 - **Main issues:** principle outside settlement, S5 with a five-year supply, character, access, BNG - **Tags:** s5-4-exceptional, s5-1-j, five-year-supply-met, sustainable-location-pass, design-refusal, large-scheme, open-market ## Summary An outline for 50 homes (40% affordable) on fields next to Drakes Broughton, outside the development boundary. With a new local plan and a five-year supply, the officer held that S5(1)(j) was simply unavailable, treated the scheme under S5(4) "exceptional circumstances", and refused under delegated powers. The location was found "relatively sustainable" under TR3. The decisive harms were the S5 principle, countryside encroachment under DP3 and a string of technical gaps. ## Issues and findings - **Principle, S3(1)(a) and S5: FAIL.** "physically the site is clearly separate from the village with it being located beyond the village's established northern building line … and so is not considered to be located within a predominantly built up area" (Report, Principle). "Due to its type and location and noting that the Council is able to demonstrate a five year housing land supply, none of the types of development set out within policy S5 are applicable" (Principle; repeated in the Planning Balance). - **TR3: PASS.** "with the exception of the secondary school and the doctor's surgery, the application site is located within a suitable walking distance of key residential amenities … on balance the application site occupies a relatively sustainable location, in compliance with policy SWDPR 06 … and policy TR3 of the NPPF (2026)" (Locational Sustainability). - **Design, DP3(3): FAIL.** The officer quotes DP3(3): "development proposals should be refused if, without clear justification, they conflict with paragraph 1 … substantial weight should be given to compliance with relevant development plan policies when assessing the design quality" (Character). The refusal reason cites "unwarranted and conspicuous encroachment of built form into the open-countryside" (Decision Notice RfR 2). - **Access, TR3/TR4/TR6: FAIL** for insufficient information (RfR 3). ## Planning balance The S5(4) exceptional-circumstances test was applied: "should only be approved in exceptional circumstances, where the benefits of the proposal would substantially outweigh the adverse effects". The officer listed ten adverse effects and set against them homes (HO7), construction benefits and local spend. "However, as outlined above the Council is able to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply … it is not considered that the benefits of the proposal would substantially outweigh the adverse effects" (Planning Balance). ## What made the difference The five-year supply shut the S5(1)(j) gateway. That moved the scheme from "approve unless substantially outweighed" to "refuse unless benefits substantially outweigh", which is a reversed burden. A walkable location passing TR3 did not rescue it. Without a supply, S5(1)(j)(i) ("physically well-related", "scale … accommodated") would have been the test, and the building-line and encroachment points would have been argued under "well-related" instead. ## Transferable points - With a five-year supply, officers treat S5(1)(j) as "not applicable" and go straight to S5(4) exceptional circumstances (Principle). - Passing TR3 does not establish principle outside settlements. The location was "relatively sustainable" and the scheme was still refused. - A site "beyond the village's established northern building line" and surrounded on three sides by fields is "not … within a predominantly built up area", so it is outside the Annex B "settlement" (Principle). - DP3(3) now gives "substantial weight … to compliance with relevant development plan policies" on design. It is being used as a countryside-encroachment refusal ground (RfR 2). ## Policy findings - **S5(1)(j): not-engaged.** with a five-year supply (July 2026 report, 20% buffer), "none of the types of development set out within policy S5 are applicable" - **S5(4): fail.** no exceptional circumstances; the benefits do not "substantially outweigh" the adverse effects - **TR3: pass.** "relatively sustainable location". Shop 643 m, first school 965 m, village hall 804 m, all within the 2 km CIHT walking figure; school-run buses 321 m away; better bus stops about 1 km - **DP3(3): fail.** "unwarranted and conspicuous encroachment" into open countryside beyond the village's northern building line; substantial weight to compliance with plan design policies (Design Code SPD 2026) - **TR6(4): fail.** insufficient access information (closure of the existing access, fire appliances, visibility), so a severe impact is not ruled out - **HO7: benefit.** "substantial weight" to homes is recited, but the five-year supply and temporary economic benefits reduce it in the S5(4) balance ## Key facts - The site adjoins, and lies up to 37 m from, the Drakes Broughton development boundary, beyond the village's northern building line; Grade 3b land; much of it at medium to high surface-water flood risk - The SWDPR was adopted March 2026; the South Worcestershire five-year supply was confirmed with a 20% buffer (July 2026) - The officer refused to consider unsolicited information submitted after 15 Jul 2026 - [object Object] - A nearby 59-home outline on Stonebow Road (W/25/01931/OUT), resolved in March 2026, had its permission issued on 25 Aug 2026 ## Sources - https://plan.wychavon.gov.uk/Planning/Display/W/26/01322/OUT - https://plan.wychavon.gov.uk/Document/Download?module=PLA&recordNumber=119896&planId=3250462&imageId=175&isPlan=False&fileName=delegated%20report_W2601322OUT.pdf - https://plan.wychavon.gov.uk/Document/Download?module=PLA&recordNumber=119896&planId=3250468&imageId=177&isPlan=False&fileName=Decision%20Notice_W2601322OUT.pdf --- Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/wychavon-W-26-01322-OUT.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.