Planning appeal decision
The land at Land North of Willoughby Drive, Rainham, RM13 7BW
improvements to York Road and part of Willoughby Drive. Summary
- Authority
- London Borough of Havering
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- minerals-waste · Change of use
- Inspector
- Steen A
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the development set out in the breach of planning control comprises inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies
- Whether there are other matters that result in additional harm
- Whether there are other considerations weighing in favour of the development
- Whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. If so, does this amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal
- Whether the development comprises inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies (Appeal B)
- The effect of the development on the safe and efficient operation of the highway network in the vicinity of the appeal site (Appeal B)
What decided it
In Appeal A the Green Belt harm from inappropriate development was not clearly outweighed by other considerations, so very special circumstances were not demonstrated; in Appeal B the works were found not to harm Green Belt openness or highway safety, so the appeal succeeded.
Appeal A: substantial weight attributed to Green Belt harm was not clearly outweighed by the considerable weight given to waste-hierarchy/circular economy benefits and the lack of an alternative site, so the balance tipped against the appellant; Appeal B: no Green Belt or highway harm was found to weigh against the proposal, so the balance favoured allowing the appeal.
Framework references: 149, 57
Plan policies cited: Policy DC45, Policy G2, Policy DC55, Policy SI 7, Policy CP11, Policy W1, Policy SI 8, Policy SI 9, Policy W5, Policy DC32, Policy DC72, Policy T3, Policy T4, Policy DF1
Judgments cited: Secretary of State for the Environment, Terry Holding v Thurrock Borough Council [2002] EWCA Civ. 226; Gestmin v Credit Suisse [2013] EWHC 3560
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.
®