DEVASSIST: 795-Home Urban Extension Approved on Unallocated Greenfield Land
A major appeal decision in Gloucestershire has highlighted once again how rapidly a weakened housing land supply can shift planning outcomes – even on large, unallocated greenfield sites that sit outside defined settlement boundaries.
Persimmon Homes has secured permission for a 795-home scheme on land north of Cam, following Stroud District Council’s failure to determine the hybrid application. The plans include full permission for 226 homes, with the remainder coming forward through outline consent.
A site outside the settlement limit – but within an emerging allocation
The appeal site forms the majority of a wider 40-hectare draft allocation currently being examined as part of Stroud’s new Local Plan Review. The emerging allocation is intended to provide around 900 homes and land for a new two-form entry primary school.
However, because the Local Plan has been under examination since 2021, the emerging allocation carries limited weight. Uncertainty over objections, evidence gaps and timescales means the existing adopted plan still takes precedence.
Under the current plan, the appeal site sits clearly beyond Cam’s settlement boundary, where development should only occur in tightly defined circumstances. On that basis, the proposal conflicted with key spatial strategy policies.
Council position shifts, leaving the housing land supply question central
Despite those policy conflicts, the council ultimately chose not to contest the appeal, subject to agreement on environmental mitigation.
This left the Inspector to focus on key issues: whether the site represents sustainable growth, the scheme’s impact on local character, and the weight to give to the district’s housing shortfall.
Although outside the settlement limit, the Inspector agreed that the location, directly adjacent to Cam and close to local services, aligns with the objectives of directing growth towards accessible and well-connected places. The site was therefore deemed capable of forming a sustainable urban extension.
A “significant shortfall” against the five-year requirement
Stroud’s housing land supply position proved decisive. The Inspector noted the district could demonstrate only 3.24 years of supply – a shortfall of 1,461 dwellings over five years and far below the NPPF’s minimum requirement.
With the district’s spatial strategy “not keeping pace with housing needs”, the NPPF’s tilted balance was engaged. This required the Inspector to approve the development unless the harms clearly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits.
Design, accessibility and mitigation tipped the balance
The Inspector found that the scheme would:
- deliver a substantial number of homes, including a mix to meet local needs
- provide safe and suitable access for all users
- incorporate appropriate landscaping, pathways and design features responding to local character
- successfully manage and mitigate environmental and highway impacts
While there were acknowledged conflicts with adopted policy, the harm was not judged sufficient to override the benefits. When considered against national policy as a whole, the appeal was allowed.
What this decision signals for buyers and conveyancers
This case shows how large-scale development can gain approval on unallocated greenfield sites when a council’s housing land supply dips. Settlement limits, long-running plan examinations and emerging allocations all become more fluid when supply falls short – increasing uncertainty for anyone buying or lending against nearby property.
For homebuyers, developers and professional advisers, understanding the broader planning picture is critical. Land that appears protected or low-risk today may be far more vulnerable to future development than it seems.
Kindly shared by DevAssist
