Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Notice varied and upheld28 April 20223248171

Land Adjacent to Long Leys Barn, Fanshaws Lane, Brickendon, Hertford, SG13 8PG

‘Site to contain one static caravan, with parking for two vehicles and associated infrastructure (retrospective)’. Summary

Authority
East Hertfordshire District Council
Appeal type
enforcement · Enforcement Notice
Procedure
Hearing
Development
caravan-gypsy · Minor traveller and caravan pitches
Inspector
Renaudon L

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Gypsy or Traveller status
  • Whether inappropriate development in the Green Belt, to include consideration of the effects on openness and purposes of the GB
  • Any other asserted harm/policy conflicts (character and appearance of the Brickendon Conservation Area; locational sustainability; effect on highway safety and essential services; storage and utility services; size/location/scale; character of the area)
  • The effects of the proposal on the listed building (Fanshaws) as well as on other designated or non-designated heritage assets
  • Whether harm to the GB and any other harm is clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to very special circumstances
  • Whether the time stipulated for compliance with the enforcement notice's requirements falls short of what should reasonably be allowed

What decided it

The substantial harm to the Green Belt's openness and purposes, together with great weight given to unresolved harm to the setting of the listed building and Conservation Area, was not clearly outweighed by the considerations advanced in favour of the development, so very special circumstances did not exist.

the considerable weight given to meeting gypsy/traveller accommodation needs, moderate weight to health and wellbeing, significant weight to the children's best interests, and limited weight to the lack of an alternative site were found insufficient to clearly outweigh the substantial Green Belt harm and great weight attributed to heritage harm, so the balance tipped against allowing the appeals

Framework references: 149, 150

Plan policies cited: Policy GBR1, Policy HOU9, Policy HOU10, Policy HA1, Policy HA2, Policy HA7, Policy TRA1, Policy DPS2, Policy DES2, Policy DES3, Policy DES4, Policy HA4

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.