72 Feiashill Road Trysull WOLVERHAMPTON WV5 7HT

1. 1.The application site lies within the West Midlands Green Belt. Whilst parts of the site comprise previously developed land, the proposed redevelopment would result in the erection of 9 detached dwellings comprising four and five bedroom properties, together with associated domestic curtilages, access roads, parking areas and other residential paraphernalia, across a substantially greater extent of the site than is presently developed. By reason of the scale, height and distribution of the proposed dwellings, the development would result in a marked spread and intensification of built form and would have a materially greater impact on the spatial and visual openness of the Green Belt than the existing lawful commercial use. Consequently, the proposal would cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt and would not satisfy the previously developed land exception set out in national Green Belt policy. The proposal therefore constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and substantial weight must be attached to that harm. The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the considerations advanced by the applicant, whether individually or cumulatively, clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt and the other harms arising from the proposal. Very special circumstances do not therefore exist. The proposal is consequently contrary to Policy GB1 of the South Staffordshire Core Strategy, Policy DS1 of the emerging Local Plan and Policies GB6 and GB7 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
2. 2.The application site occupies an isolated and unsustainable location outside any settlement. Future occupiers would have limited access to employment opportunities, retail facilities, healthcare provision, secondary education and other day to day services by sustainable modes of transport. The site is not served by a bus service and there are no continuous footways, pedestrian crossing facilities or street lighting linking the site to nearby settlements and services. As a consequence, future residents would be heavily reliant upon private motor vehicles for the vast majority of journeys. The development would therefore fail to provide a genuine choice of transport modes, would not support sustainable patterns of growth, and would conflict with the Council's settlement hierarchy which seeks to direct new housing to the most sustainable and accessible locations. Accordingly, the proposal represents an unsustainable form of development and is contrary to Core Policy 1 of the Core Strategy, policy DS5 of the emerging Local Plan, and Policies TR3 and HO11 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
3. 3.The proposed development would provide 2 no. four bedroom dwellings and 7 no. five bedroom dwellings, with no one, two or three bedroom properties. The development therefore fails to provide a housing mix that reflects the District's identified housing needs, which demonstrate the greatest demand for smaller two and three bedroom homes. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy H1 of the Core Strategy and emerging Policy HC1 of emerging Local Plan.
4. 4.Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the existing site access can safely accommodate the intensification of use arising from the proposed development. In particular, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that adequate provision has been made to ensure the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders using the adjacent public bridleway, or that the increased vehicle movements associated with the development would not result in an unacceptable impact upon highway safety. The proposal would therefore fail to provide safe and suitable access for all users and has not demonstrated that it would avoid an unacceptable impact on highway safety, contrary to Core Policy 11, emerging Policy EC12 and Policies TR3, TR4, TR6 and TR8 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
5. 5.The proposal would result in the loss of an established lawful employment use. Insufficient evidence has been submitted to demonstrate that the continued employment use of the site has been adequately explored, that the site has been appropriately marketed, or that the loss of the employment use would accord with the Council's employment land strategy. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy EV1 of the Core Strategy and policy EC2 of the emerging Local Plan.
6. 6.Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the development has appropriately applied the mitigation hierarchy or minimised impacts upon woodland habitat within the site. The proposal fails to adequately justify the loss and fragmentation of woodland habitat or demonstrate that the development has been designed to retain important ecological features wherever possible. In the absence of an acceptable layout demonstrating avoidance and minimisation of woodland loss, the Local Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the development could be made acceptable through landscaping, biodiversity net gain or other subsequent mitigation. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy EQ1 of the Core Strategy, policies NB1 and NB2 of the emerging Local Plan and policy N2 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
7. 7.Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that surface water arising from the development can be disposed of satisfactorily without increasing flood risk on the site or elsewhere. In particular, no infiltration testing has been provided to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed drainage strategy, and the Lead Local Flood Authority maintains an objection to the proposal due to feasibility rather than detailed design. The proposal is therefore contrary to core policy 3 and policy EQ7 of the Core Strategy, policy NB7 of the emerging Local Plan and policies F4, F7 and F8 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
8. 8.The application site exceeds 0.5 hectares in area and therefore constitutes major development for the purposes of the National Planning Policy Framework. As a major housing development within the Green Belt, the proposal is subject to Policy GB8 (Golden Rules) of the NPPF, which requires the provision of 35% affordable housing under the adopted Core Strategy. The application fails to secure any policy compliant affordable housing provision and no exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated to justify a departure from this requirement. The proposal would therefore fail to contribute towards meeting identified affordable housing needs and is contrary to Policy H2 of the Core Strategy, emerging Policy HC3 of the Local Plan, and Policy GB8 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

From the council's decision notice.

Postcode

WV5 7HT

Application type

Outline Application

Scale / size

Small

Parish

TRYSULL & SEISDON

Date validated

27 February 2026

Consultation expiry

27 March 2026

Consultation start

27 February 2026

Consultation end

18 September 2026

Neighbour consultation start

27 February 2026

Last date for comments

27 March 2026

Target decision date

2 October 2026

Agent

Simpatico Town Planning

Agent address

33 Musk Lane West Gornal Wood DY3 2UJ

Statutory period

56 days

Site notice start

6 March 2026

Site notice end

27 March 2026

Planning Portal ID

PP-14537619

Documents

22

Constraints

3