Written by Nikki O’Hagan, 20th March 2025
Planning Direct’s Jamie Cann has recently secured planning permission for a new residential development in the Metropolitan Green Belt. Read on to find out more about our Abbess Roding success story.
The location
The development site is located in the open countryside, roughly 0.6 miles from the nearest village of Abbess Roding. The market town of Epping is around 13 miles to its south-west and the City of Chelmsford is some 11 miles to its south-east. Stanstead Airport is located 10 miles to its north.
The site was described by the Local Planning Authority as “isolated” and “remote”.
The site is also located within the Metropolitan Green Belt where there are additional controls on development. Visit CPRE for an interactive map of all of England’s Green Belts or simply follow this link:
The site
The site belongs to an historic farmstead containing multiple buildings – both commercial and residential. The main farmhouse has C17 origins and although it is not statutorily listed, the Local Planning Authority considers it to be a “non-designated heritage asset”.
The site contains at least three residential outbuildings, including sheds, a pool house and kennels. It also includes a large pond, part of an historic moat and numerous trees.
Planning history: permission refused in 2023
The landowner had made two previous attempts to secure planning permission on this site. Unfortunately, both were unsuccessful – the original 2020 application was withdrawn and the Local Planning Authority refused planning permission on the second attempt. The second application sought to demolish the outbuildings and construct 3 detached dwellings in their place. The Local Planning Authority refused planning permission in 2023, citing 6 separate reasons for refusal.
The reasons given for refusal of the second planning application were:
- Because of its isolated location, the site is unsustainable. Residents would be reliant on the private car to access shops, schools, services etc.
- Inappropriate development in the Green Belt. In addition, the development would harm Green Belt openness.
- Because of the height, scale and residential nature of the development, it would have an incongruous appearance and cause harm to the rural character of the area.
- The scale, bulk and mass of the development would appear overbearing and visually intrusive, harming the residential amenities of a neighbouring dwelling.
- The proposed basements have the potential to cause structural instability.
- There is a lack of mitigation for the expected increase in air pollution.
The new planning application
In close consultation with the landowners and architects, Jamie Cann began work on a revised planning application. Jamie was confident that all of the reasons for refusal of the previous planning application were capable of being resolved. The design of the development was amended and a new planning statement was prepared to address the Local Planning Authority’s Green Belt and sustainability concerns.
The new planning application sought consent for 2 dwellings, rather than 3. Material amendments were also made to their design, to include:
- Reduction in overall size and height.
- Removal of basements.
- Change in architectural style. Whereas the previous application sought consent for formal, “stately home” style dwellings, the new application proposed simple, barn-style buildings.
The Green Belt argument
Anyone familiar with the industry will know that gaining planning permission in the Green Belt poses its own unique challenges. There are national constraints on development in the Green Belt that do not apply in other locations and Local Planning Authorities can also introduce additional restrictions. The Labour government has recently relaxed some of those constraints but it is unlikely that Green Belt controls will ever be removed entirely. Follow the link below to find out more about the main Green Belt policy changes brought in by Labour:
In the case of our Abbess Roding scheme, we were confident that national Green Belt policy was supportive even before the new Labour government made its changes. Since the introduction of Labour’s revised National Planning Policy Framework in December 2024, this support has been significantly strengthened.
Exceptional development in the Green Belt: previously developed land
National planning policy has always provided support for certain types of “exceptional” developments in the Green Belt. Those exceptions are updated occasionally and the changes made can have significant implications for previously refused developments.
National Green Belt policy has long allowed for the redevelopment of “previously developed land” located in the Green Belt. However, prior to 2024, redevelopment was generally only permitted if it would “not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development”. In practice, this usually meant that any increase in the number, size or visual prominence of a site’s buildings would lead to a refusal of planning permission.
In December 2024, this Green Belt policy was altered such that the redevelopment of “previously developed land” is now permitted as long as the new development “would not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt”. This new test is far easier to meet and should unlock the development potential of previously developed Green Belt sites that contain single buildings, very small buildings, remnants of buildings or only hardstandings.
What counts as previously developed land?
The National Planning Policy Framework contains a complete definition of previously developed land. To summarise that rather lengthy definition, previously developed land is –
- Land that has been lawfully developed AND
- Is or was occupied by a permanent structure (generally a building).
The site does not need to be in active use. However, land cannot count as previously developed if it –
- Is or was last occupied by an agricultural or forestry building.
- Is or was last used for minerals extraction or waste disposal.
- Is located in a built-up area and consists of a green space. Specifically excluded from the definition are the following types of sites but only if they are located in a built-up area:
- residential gardens, recreation grounds, parks and allotments.
- Was previously developed but the remains of its permanent structure have since blended into the landscape.
The Abbess Roding site
Our site consists of residential garden land but is located in the open countryside away from any built-up areas. It also contains a range of permanent outbuildings. It is consequently previously developed land and was therefore able to take advantage of the national Green Belt policy described above.
A lesson in planning policy and perseverance
Planning policies are updated more frequently than you might think and policy changes often go hand in hand with changes in government. So a refusal of planning permission does not mean a site is forever “undevelopable”. If you have had planning permission refused in the past, the new national policies introduced in 2024 may provide newfound support for your development. This is especially the case for Green Belt sites formerly considered to be “undevelopable”, particularly sites that comply with the definition of “previously developed land”.
The decision
Following two previous failed attempts by the landowner, Planning Direct is delighted to have assisted our client to secure planning permission for two new dwellings on previously developed land in the Metropolitan Green Belt. Planning permission for the Abbess Roding Green Belt development was granted by Epping Forest District Council at the end of 2024, avoiding the need to appeal.
If you own previously developed land in the Green Belt, there is now an excellent chance of gaining planning permission for its residential redevelopment. Contact Planning Direct today for a preliminary assessment. Our initial advice is always free of charge.