The Daily Decision Digest: 17 July 2026
Forty-eight appeals were decided yesterday permitting 93 new dwellings in total, comprising an 80-home outline scheme in Solihull, permission in principle for seven homes in Cheshire East, and smaller housing and permitted-development schemes — the selected decisions below address grey-belt policy and the Green Belt “Golden Rules”, traveller-site need against Green Infrastructure harm, rural housing, habitats obligations, and the limits of Class MA prior approval.
Solihull: Grey-belt housing scheme allowed with 50% affordable provision
Following a hearing, outline permission was granted for up to 80 dwellings on land within the Green Belt at Hockley Heath. The Inspector found the contained site to be grey belt and concluded that it did not strongly perform relevant Green Belt purposes. With a substantial housing-land-supply shortfall, sustainable connections to village facilities and a section 106 securing 50% affordable housing and infrastructure contributions, the proposal met the Framework’s relevant grey-belt and Golden Rules tests. (6005246)
St Helens: Traveller pitches refused despite an unproven five-year supply
A two-pitch family traveller site was dismissed after a hearing. The Inspector found that the Council could not demonstrate an up-to-date five-year supply of deliverable traveller sites, owing to an outdated need assessment and uncertainty over part of the claimed supply. However, the substantial harm to the designated Greenway Network, including its landscape, amenity and wildlife-corridor functions, significantly and demonstrably outweighed the family’s accommodation needs and the children’s best interests. (6004643)
Cheshire East: Seven-home permission in principle allowed in open countryside
Permission in principle for up to seven dwellings at Chestnut Farm, Hassall Green, was allowed. The appeal illustrates the confined scope of the permission-in-principle stage, where the relevant considerations are location, land use and amount of development rather than detailed design, drainage or amenity matters. The Inspector accepted the residential principle notwithstanding the countryside location, leaving technical matters for a subsequent technical-details-consent application. (6006771)
East Suffolk: Self-build homes approved with habitats mitigation secured
Outline permission for two self-build dwellings was granted at Tuddenham St Martin. The Inspector found that the location and scale were acceptable and that the proposed unilateral undertaking, as revised during the appeal, addressed recreational pressure on designated European sites. (6006711)
Teignbridge: Class Q conversion allowed for two dwellings
Prior approval was granted under Class Q for the conversion of an agricultural building to two dwellings. The decision confirms that a steel-framed agricultural building can qualify where the statutory conditions are met, with the Inspector assessing the proposal under the specific Class Q limitations and prior-approval matters rather than as a conventional countryside housing application. (6003886)
Somerset: Class MA route fails where residential accommodation is not separate
A Class MA appeal for commercial-to-residential conversion in Wells was dismissed because the building was in mixed Class E and C3 use, rather than solely qualifying Class E use for the required two-year period. The first-floor accommodation was not physically separate or demonstrably capable of independent occupation from the ground floor. The Inspector therefore did not need to consider prior-approval matters, including transport or the net increase in dwellings. (6005993)
Ashford: Listed-building extension refused on heritage grounds
Planning permission and listed building consent for a two-storey rear extension at Hammer Mill Farm, Biddenden, were both dismissed. The paired decision applied the statutory duties for listed buildings and found that the alterations would fail to preserve the building’s special interest. It reinforces the need for proposals affecting designated heritage assets to demonstrate an appropriate relationship with the historic fabric and significance of the building. (6003958)
Search the full text of all PINS appeal decisions for free at www.appealbase.com