DEVASSIST: How a missed policy test changed the outcome of a green belt housing appeal

A planning inspector has approved a 120-home development on green belt land near Beaconsfield, following a High Court ruling that overturned an earlier appeal refusal due to a failure to consider key national policy requirements.

The decision brings an end to a protracted planning process for land promoter Hawridge Strategic Land, whose proposals had previously been rejected despite offering a high proportion of affordable housing and supporting infrastructure.

Original refusal and failed appeal

The application, relating to land at Holtspur on the edge of Beaconsfield, was initially refused by Buckinghamshire Council in March 2024. The scheme proposed 120 new homes, with half designated as affordable.

An appeal against that refusal was dismissed in early 2025, when the appointed inspector concluded that the site did not qualify as grey belt land under national planning policy. He found that the land played a strong role in preventing urban sprawl and the merging of settlements, meaning the proposal amounted to inappropriate development in the green belt.

On that basis, the inspector determined that the scheme could only proceed if very special circumstances were demonstrated, and concluded that this threshold had not been met.

High Court identifies missing policy consideration

That decision was later challenged, and in May 2025, the High Court quashed the appeal outcome by consent of all parties. The court found that a material consideration had been overlooked, namely, whether the proposal complied with the National Planning Policy Framework’s so-called “golden rules” for major green belt housing schemes.

Those rules require developments to deliver enhanced levels of affordable housing, meaningful infrastructure improvements and publicly accessible green space. Where met, national policy states that significant weight should be given in favour of granting permission.

Although the original inspector had correctly assessed the site against the definition of grey belt land, the court concluded that the failure to assess compliance with the golden rules rendered the decision legally flawed. The appeal was therefore returned to the Planning Inspectorate for redetermination, with costs awarded to the appellant.

Fresh appeal decision reaches different conclusion

In the subsequent appeal decision, the newly appointed inspector noted that the local authority was no longer defending its original reasons for refusal. While objections from third parties were still considered, the focus shifted to the green belt designation, landscape impact and ecological considerations.

The inspector concluded that the site should now be treated as grey belt land, finding that it did not make a strong contribution to safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. He also noted that the authority could demonstrate less than one year of housing land supply, indicating a clear and pressing need for new homes.

Turning to the golden rules, the inspector found that the scheme met the policy tests. The proposed level of affordable housing, alongside new public green space and transport improvements, aligned with national requirements for green belt housing release.

As a result, he concluded that the development would not constitute inappropriate development and that green belt policy did not provide a strong basis for refusal.

Planning balance tips in favour of approval

While the scheme was acknowledged to cause some harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area, this was assessed as moderate. The inspector concluded that the identified harm did not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development.

Those benefits included the delivery of much-needed housing, affordable homes, economic activity and wider social and environmental gains. The appeal was therefore allowed.

Why this matters for conveyancers

This case shows how the interpretation and application of national policy can materially change planning outcomes, particularly in green belt locations. For conveyancers, it highlights the importance of understanding not just whether land is designated as green belt, but how grey belt status and golden rule compliance are being applied in practice.

DevAssist tracks these policy-driven shifts and appeal outcomes to help conveyancers assess planning risk with greater confidence, providing a clearer context around developments that have moved through complex or contested decision-making routes.

Kindly shared by DevAssist