Flood risk provides a strong reason for refusing development and results in that conclusion that land is not “grey belt” in refused planning appeal decision in Spelthorne
David Lintott acted for the Spelthorne Borough Council. Conjoined Appeals against refusal to grant planning permission and enforcement notice dismissed: 26 January 2026.
These appeals related to the refusal of the Council to grant permission for residential development and operational development at Land south east of The Ranges, addressed as 1A Priory Stables, Shepperton TW17 9NU. The appeals were dismissed because of flooding, green belt and landscape considerations.
On the main issue Inspector Peter Willows BA MRTPI, an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, held that the development did not amount to development on grey belt land as defined in paragraph 155 of the National Planning Policy Framework (“the Framework”) because of flooding considerations. In particular, emerging local plan policy on managing flood risk was given great weight, and off site flood risk meaning safe access to the site could not be demonstrated was given particular importance. Combined with the failure to carry out an adequate sequential test for development within flood zone 2, these considerations amounted to a strong reason to refuse permission, when applying footnote 7 to paragraph 11 of the Framework. The development constituted inappropriate development in the green belt (see paragraphs [23-6], [46-7], [53-4], [61-2] and [66], and also caused significant landscape harm ([37, [41-4]), the Inspector preferring the evidence of Mr Dudley of Rowellian Environmental Consulting instructed by the Council on that issue. A conjoined enforcement appeal for operational development was also dismissed.
The appeal is notable as containing a good discussion of how flooding considerations can operate to provide a strong reason to refuse permission. The decision also contains a useful discussion of when land is previously developed land (“PDL”) as discussed at paragraph 154g of the Framework, considering the amended definition of PDL contained within that document. The Inspector preferring the evidence of Mr Steven Jupp of Planning Solutions, instructed by the Council, that the land was not PDL.
Please click here for a copy of the decision.
David Lintott acted for the Local Planning Authority. Cornerstone Barristers regularly acts for both Local Planning Authorities and Developers in a wide range of planning matters. For more information please contact 020 7242 4986 or email clerks@cornerstonebarristers.com.
