The main parties agreed that the site constituted previously developed land, engaging NPPF paragraph 145(g) such that a partial or complete redevelopment not having a greater impact on the openness of the green belt than the livery stables would be an exception to development being inappropriate in the green belt.
The inspector acknowledged that the proposal would reduce the numerical amount of built form on the appeal site but considered the distinctively suburban development with houses laid out around a tarmac cul-de-sac, residential paraphernalia, boundary walls and fences would lead to a loss of openness. In addition the siting of some dwellings closer to the boundaries than existing built form would sprawl development across the appeal site. Overall he concluded the proposal would be far more visually intrusive in the green belt than the current buildings. Rejecting a lack of five year housing land supply as a very special circumstance in itself to justify the development, the inspector dismissed the appeal.
Inspector: David Wallis; Written representations