Appeal 6005174

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for demolition of the existing dwelling on site and development of nine apartments with associated access, parking and landscaping at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, reference TA/2025/904, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

An application for costs was made by [name] of [name] and New Homes Limited against Tandridge District Council. This is the subject of a separate

The main issues are:

whether the proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) and any relevant development plan policies and the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt; and

the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site formed part of a draft housing allocation in a withdrawn Local Plan, access to which would be taken via an empty plot immediately to the left of the site as seen from the street. The rest of the allocation now has outline permission for 150 dwellings, but both it and the appeal site remain within the Green Belt.

The Framework identifies that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. It goes on to state that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. The Framework further establishes that the construction of new buildings in the Green Belt should be regarded as inappropriate, subject to exceptions set out in paragraph 154.

These include “the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces” and “... the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed land ... which would not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt”.

The further exception at paragraph 155 requires that development be on grey belt land, not fundamentally undermine the purposes (taken together) of the remaining Green Belt across the area of the plan, be of a type for which the there is an unmet need and be in a sustainable location. Major development (e.g. 10 dwellings or more) must also contribute to affordable housing and other infrastructures.

Policy DP10 ‘Green Belt’ of the Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: [name] 2014-2029 (TLP2) states that proposals involving inappropriate development in the Green Belt will only be permitted where very special circumstances exist, to the extent that other considerations clearly outweigh any potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm.

TLP2 Policy DP13 ‘Buildings in the Green Belt’ states that the Council will regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in the Green Belt, subject to exceptions, which include the redevelopment of previously developed sites where the proposal would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

The site comprises a house with part of an area of scrubland to its rear. Whilst the parties agree that the site is previously developed, part is outside the garden. I have no evidence as to the previous use of that land, which appears undeveloped and overgrown. The location is at the edge of a large village with facilities and bus stops within walking distance and busy railway stations about a mile away.

The proposal would demolish the house and replace it with a two-and-a-half storey building containing nine apartments with a car park to the front and shared garden to the sides and rear, the latter extending into the scrubland. The existing dropped kerb would be replaced with a radiused access to the car park. The footprint of the replacement building would be just over two-and-a-half times, and its volume would be just under three times, those of the existing.

It is common ground, and I agree, that the proposed building would be materially larger. Because part of the site is previously undeveloped, this means that neither of the exceptions for replacement buildings or for the redevelopment of previously developed land at TLP2 Policy DP13 or paragraph 154 of the Framework apply.

The appellant also contends that the proposal is on grey belt land and meets the criteria at paragraph 155 of the Framework. For these purposes, villages are not considered ‘large built-up areas’1 and the site both contains and is partially enclosed by existing development. Furthermore, the site is neither between towns nor in the setting of a historic town. Therefore, it does not strongly contribute to purposes (a), (b), or (d) of Green Belt at paragraph 143 of the Framework. 1 Planning Practice Guidance Ref. ID: 64-005-20250225

Whilst the Council considers that the proposal would lead to the loss of a building of significant character and identity, there is no evidence it is a heritage asset such that the application of policies in the Framework relating to those could provide a strong reason for refusing permission. Neither would policies at footnote 7 of the Framework that protect other areas or assets of particular importance provide such a reason. Therefore, I find that the site comprises grey belt land.

Further to the lack of strong contribution outlined above, the proposal would not undermine the purposes of remaining Green Belt, as it is partially enclosed and I have no evidence of sites awaiting regeneration. The district has a 1.92-year housing land supply, so an unmet need for the proposal, which provides a range of unit sizes, is demonstrable. The site is also within walking distance of facilities and bus services and within a mile of well-served railway stations.

Thus, the proposal meets the criteria at paragraph 155 of the Framework, is not inappropriate development and its effect on openness need not be considered.

The existing house is two-storey, detached, rendered and painted white. It has a dual pitched roof and Dutch gables. The area is characterised by dwellings of a variety of formats and sizes, including bungalows, cottages, semi-detached and detached houses set in landscape with mature trees and hedgerows. Extensions and redevelopments have resulted in large houses set back from the street.

The Council states that the proposal would remove a building of significant character and identity but provides no further detail beyond reporting comments from the County Council’s heritage officer. These state that no built heritage assets are affected and that the building does not meet the criteria for statutory or local listing due to its relatively recent construction and later alterations.

Other than distinctive Dutch gables and a frontage that faces sideways to more recent housing, the house appears unremarkable. Another house further along the road has similar, albeit unrendered, gables. However, I do not consider those of the subject building sufficiently important to make it a landmark building or otherwise architecturally significant.

The replacement would be a materially larger building, but is well considered, using dual pitched roofs over wide spans to contain floor space while retaining the appearance of a single large dwelling. Whilst it would have amongst the larger footprints in the vicinity, it would not appear unusual in the context of other nearby dwellings and would be articulated in such a way as to reduce massing.

The overall plot size, including the area of scrubland to the rear, is such that it could accommodate a building of the proposed size without appearing cramped. The proposed siting would maintain a similar set back from the street to the existing dwelling and would broadly reflect that elsewhere in the area. The scale would similarly reflect that of larger houses nearby.

Overall, I conclude that neither the loss of the existing dwelling, nor the proposed replacement, would harm the character or appearance of the area. Thus, I find no conflict with Tandridge District Core Strategy Policy CSP18 or TLP2 Policy DP7.

I have had regard to both the likelihood and likely effect of the development with outline permission on adjacent land and its access through the neighbouring vacant plot. The proposed building would be sited sufficiently far from that road to provide adequate living conditions for the occupiers of the apartments. As the highway authority does not object, I am also satisfied that the access would not harm road safety and that the proposal would have adequate parking.

[name] note the Parish Council’s and others’ objections, increased size does not make development on grey belt land inappropriate. As it is not inappropriate and is also minor, neither very special circumstances nor infrastructure contributions are required. I am also satisfied that the proposal would not unduly harm trees or the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers and that appropriate biodiversity net gain, landscaping and charging points can be secured by conditions.

The appellant’s Statement of Case states that the plot is surrounded by existing and new development. Whether or not one infers that ‘new’ is meant as not yet existing, but rather development with permission, I have been able to form my own view as to the surroundings and likely effects of development. I have distinguished the effects on Green Belt and on character and appearance of sites within Green Belt from those of recent redevelopment nearby that is not within Green Belt.

Finally, I accept that land of which the appeal site forms part may not be allocated in a future Local Plan but note that the larger part has outline permission. I have formed a view as to the strength of the specific contribution of the appeal site to Green Belt purposes (a), (b), or (d) and whether the development of the site specifically would fundamentally undermine the purposes, taken together, of the remaining Green Belt within the plan area, including that with outline permission.

Paragraph 232 of the Framework states that weight should be given to policies adopted prior to its publication in December 2024, according to their degree of consistency with the Framework. TLP2 was adopted in July 2014, its Policies DP10 and DP13 are not consistent with the Framework in respect of grey belt and, as a result, should now be given lesser weight. Therefore, whilst the proposal is not excepted by these policies, I attach only modest weight to this conflict.

The shortage of housing land in the district means that paragraph 11d of the Framework is engaged. The proposal is not subject to policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance, and I have found that the proposal would not harm the character or appearance of the area, so there is no conflict with key policies for securing well-designed places, including those at paragraph 135 of the Framework.

It follows that there are no adverse impacts that significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of eight additional dwellings in a sustainable location, which would add to the supply of housing in circumstances of significant shortage and support the local economy during their construction. Thus, the presumption in favour of sustainable development applies in this case.

I have taken the conditions that the Council’s officer recommended in the main and supplementary reports to committee as its suggested conditions and note that the appellant agrees to the pre-commencement conditions therein. I have therefore imposed those conditions, subject to the following changes:

I have amended conditions to omit either prohibitions on amendments or ways to allow them other than by application, combined some ecology conditions and amended a condition requiring specified heat pumps to be retained to instead allow their future replacement with pumps of the same or better efficiency.

I have omitted conditions requiring a Biodiversity Net Gain Plan as this is deemed, removing permitted development rights that do not apply to flats, requiring highway condition surveys and repairs as the access will be remade, and prohibiting HGV movements at school opening and closing times as there are no schools nearby.

I have amended a condition requiring the car park and turning areas to be laid out prior to occupation to include the laying out of the proposed access. I have also added a condition requested by the County Council as lead local flood authority to require sustainable drainage to be installed prior to occupation.

For the above reasons, whilst the development would conflict with policies of the development plan, material considerations – particularly the Framework – indicate otherwise than to determine in accordance with it. Having had regard to all matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos. ADL-25-765-PL-02, ADL-25-765-PL-03, ADL-25-765-PL-04, ADL- 25-765-PL-05, ADL-25-765-PL-06, ADL-25-765-PL-07, ADL-25-765-PL-08, ADL- 25-765-PL-09 and Site Location Plan received 1 August 2025.

No development shall start until the tree protection measures detailed within the approved Tree Protection Plan (24-1884-TPP) and [name] and Arboricultural Impact Assessment dated July 2025 have been implemented. Thereafter these measures shall be retained and any specified methods of construction, arboricultural supervision or staging of works strictly adhered to throughout the course of development. In any event, the following restrictions shall be strictly observed: (a) No bonfires shall take place within the root protection area (RPA) or within a position where heat could affect foliage or branches. (b) No further trenches, drains or service runs shall be sited within the RPA of any retained trees. (c) No further changes in ground levels or excavations shall take place within the RPA of any retained trees.

Prior to the commencement of development, details of the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority: (a) a badger walkover survey (b) a bat precautionary method of working and (c) a [name] including but not limited to (i) details of the measures to be taken during construction to ensure the protection of reptiles, (ii) location and map of the proposed translocation area and (iii) details of measures to be taken to enhance the site for reptile species. The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the approved details and retained as such.

Prior to the commencement of development, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The CEMP should include, but not be limited to: (a) a map showing the location of all the ecological features (b) a risk assessment of the potentially damaging construction activities (c) practical measures to avoid and reduce impacts during construction (d) the location and timing of works to avoid harm to biodiversity features (e) responsible persons and lines of communication and (f) the use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs. Subsequently, the development shall only be undertaken in accordance with the approved CEMP, all measures set out within the approved CEMP shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the dwellings (unless a phased implementation timetable has been agreed as part of the CEMP in which case the CEMP shall be fully implemented in full accordance with that phased implementation timetable) and retained at all times thereafter.

Prior to the commencement of development, a Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) should be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The LEMP should include, but not be limited to: (a) a description and evaluation of features to be managed (b) ecological trends and constraints on site that might influence management (c) the aims and objectives of management (d) appropriate management options for achieving aims and objectives (e) prescriptions for management actions, together with a plan of management compartments (f) the preparation of a work schedule (including an annual work plan capable of being rolled forward over a 30-year period) (g) details of the body or organisation responsible for implementation of the plan (h) ongoing monitoring and remedial measures (i) legal and funding mechanisms by which the long-term implementation of the plan will be secured by the applicant with the management body(ies) responsible for its delivery and (j) a monitoring strategy, including details of how contingencies and/or remedial action will be identified, agreed and implemented so that the development still delivers the fully functioning biodiversity objectives of the originally approved scheme. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and retained as such.

No above ground development shall start (excluding demolition) until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include: (a) the proposed finished levels or contours (b) means of enclosure (c) car parking layouts (d) other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas (e) hard surfacing materials and (f) tree and hedgerow planting as compensation for those elements being removed. Details of soft landscape works shall include all proposed and retained trees, hedges and shrubs; ground preparation, planting specifications and ongoing maintenance, together with details of areas to be grass seeded or turfed. Planting schedules shall include details of species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities. All new planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the completion or occupation of any part of the development (whichever is the sooner) or otherwise in accordance with a programme to be agreed. Any trees or plants (including those retained as part of the development) which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed, or, in the opinion of the local planning authority, become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the local planning authority gives written consent to any variation. The hard landscape works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of the development.

No development shall commence until a Construction Transport Management Plan, to include details of the following has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority: (a) parking for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors (b) loading and unloading of plant and materials (c) storage of plant and materials (d) programme of works (including measures for traffic management) (e) provision of boundary hoarding behind any visibility zones (f) HGV deliveries and hours of operation (g) measures to prevent the deposit of materials on the highway and (h) use of banksmen. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

The materials to be used on the external faces of the proposed development shall be in accordance with the details shown on the submitted application particulars.

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until a sustainable drainage system has been installed in accordance with the proposals in the submitted Flood Risk Assessment & [name] document number C3598-R1-REV-A and drawings therein. The system shall thereafter be retained and maintained in accordance with the recommendations in that document.

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until the access and space for vehicles to be parked and turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear has been laid out in accordance with drawings references 2006038-TK10 and 2006038-TK11. Thereafter the parking and turning areas shall be retained and maintained for their designated purposes.

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until the following cycle facilities have been provided within the development site to be in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the said approved facilities shall be provided, retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority: (a) High quality, secure, lit and covered cycle parking for each dwelling (b) Charging point(s) with timer(s) for e-bikes within said facilities and; (c) Clear hardstanding routes between the cycle stores and the site access;

Before the development hereby approved is occupied the air source heat pumps as specified in the application details shall be installed and this system shall only be replaced by heat pumps of the same or better efficiency.

Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted, the upper-floor window/s located in a wall or roof slope forming a side elevation, as shown on drawing number ADL-25-765 PL08 shall be obscure-glazed, and non-opening unless the parts of the window which can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which the window is installed. The development shall then be retained as such. [SCHEDULE ENDS]