®Planning appeal decision
Ellesmere Port Wellsite Portside One, Portside North Ellesmere Port Cheshire CH65 2HQ
mobilise well test equipment, including a workover rig and associated equipment, to the existing wellsite to perform a workover, drill stem test and extended well test of the hydrocarbons encountered during the drilling of the EP1 well, followed by well suspension at the Ellesmere Port Wellsite, Portside North, Ellesmere Port. Summary of Recommendation: The appeal be dismissed
- Authority
- Cheshire West and Chester Council
- Appeal type
- other · Planning Appeal (W)
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- minerals-waste
- Postcode
- CH65 2HQ
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the proposal fails to mitigate and adapt to the effect of climate change and ensuring development makes the best use of the opportunity for renewable energy use and generation
- Whether the proposed development would have an unacceptable effect on human health and well-being
What decided it
The significant weight attributed to unmitigated greenhouse gas emissions, combined with conflict with Framework paragraph 152 and moderate weight harm from stress and anxiety, outweighed the moderate weight given to national policy support for shale gas exploration.
The significant weight against the proposal from unmitigated GHG emissions, together with moderate weight harm from conflict with Framework paragraph 152 and moderate weight harm from stress and anxiety, outweighed the moderate weight national policy support for shale gas exploration and the limited weight economic and site-reuse benefits, tipping the balance against permission despite accordance with the development plan.
Framework references: 152, 209, 210, 211, 55, 188
Plan policies cited: STRAT1, ENV7, M4, STRAT4, SOC5, ENV2, ENV4
Judgments cited: Claire Stephenson v Secretary of State for Housing and Communities and Local Government [2019] EWHC 519 (Admin); Afton Chemical Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [2011] 1 CMLR 16; R (Balcombe Frack Free v West Sussex CC) [2014] EWHC 4108 (Admin); Gladman Developments Ltd v Canterbury City Council [2019] PTSR 1714, [2019] EWCA Civ 669
The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.