Land at Tincklers Lane,, Eccleston, PR7 5QY

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

• Appeal A: Whether or not the proposal integrates satisfactorily with the surrounding area with particular regard to patterns of movement and connectivity
• Appeal B: The effect of the proposal on highway safety including accessibility of the appeal site
• Whether or not the Council is able to demonstrate a five-year supply of housing land
• Whether or not the most important policies of the development plan are out of date
• Whether any adverse effects, including conflict with the development plan as a whole, would be outweighed by other material considerations

What decided it

For Appeal A the absence of harm from the access/connectivity strategy allowed housing benefits to outweigh the limited conflict with safeguarded land policy BNE3; for Appeal B the failure to provide a safe and attractive alternative pedestrian/cycle access caused harm to highway safety that outweighed the benefits.

In Appeal A the benefits of market and affordable housing and economic benefits outweighed the limited weight attached to conflict with Policy BNE3, so permission was granted; in Appeal B the harm to highway safety from an unsafe pedestrian/cycle access significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits, so the appeal was dismissed despite the tilted balance being engaged.