Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Allowed5 January 20223273087

land south of barnham station, Barnham, PO22 0ER

outline planning application with all matters reserved other than principal means of access for up to 200 dwellings, with access taken from Marshall Close, associated infrastructure and landscaping and demolition of existing buildings

Authority
Arun District Council
Appeal type
major · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Inquiry
Development
residential · Major dwellings
Inspector
Spencer D

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the site represents a suitable location for residential development, having regard to development plan policies and the existing and planned settlement pattern
  • The effect on the character and appearance of the area
  • The effect on the setting of listed buildings and the Barnham Church Lane Conservation Area
  • Whether the proposal makes appropriate and safe provision for linkages to local facilities or whether it would result in an over-reliance on the private car
  • Whether the site can be successfully drained, in respect of both foul and surface water drainage
  • Whether the proposal would make appropriate provision for affordable housing and other infrastructure
  • Whether there are any material considerations, including the housing land supply position, that would indicate a decision otherwise in accordance with the development plan

What decided it

The Council's inability to demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing land (assessed at 2.63 years), which engaged the tilted balance and meant the substantial benefits of housing delivery outweighed the identified harms.

The substantial benefits of housing and affordable housing delivery, together with biodiversity net gain, public open space, and rail safety improvements, were found to outweigh the harm from conflict with development plan housing-location policies, localised character and appearance harm, and less-than-substantial harm to the conservation area's setting, such that the tilted balance favoured allowing the appeal.

Framework references: 8, 11, 14, 48, 49, 55, 56, 57, 63, 74, 92, 100, 104, 105, 110-113, 126, 130, 131, 152, 157, 159-169, 167, 174, 199, 202, 203

Plan policies cited: Policy C SP1 (ALP), Policy SD SP2 (ALP), Policy LAN DM1 (ALP), Policy H SP1 (ALP), Policy SD SP1a (ALP), Policy HER SP1 (ALP), Policy HER DM3(f) (ALP), Policy D DM1 (ALP), Policy T SP1 (ALP), Policy T DM1 (ALP), Policy QE DM3 (ALP), Policy W DM1 (ALP), Policy W DM2 (ALP), Policy W DM3 (ALP), Policy AH SP2 (ALP), Policy OSR DM1 (ALP), Policy INF SP1 (ALP), Policy SKILLS SP1 (ALP), Policy ECC SP2 (ALP), Policy HER DM6 (ALP), Policy D DM2 (ALP), Policy H DM1 (ALP), Policy WM DM1 (ALP), Policy QE DM1 (ALP), Policy QE DM2 (ALP), Policy TEL SP1 (ALP), Policy H SP2 (ALP), Policy H2 (NP1), Policy H4 (NP1), Policy ES4 (NP1), Policy ES6 (NP1), Policy ES10 (NP1), Policy ES7 (NP1), Policy GA1 (NP1), Policy GA2 (NP1), Policy CLW8 (NP1), Policy ES1 (NP1), Policy H1 (eNP2), Policy H8 (eNP2), Policy ES4 (eNP2), Policy ES5 (eNP2), Policy ES7 (eNP2), Policy ES15 (eNP2), Policy ES17 (eNP2), Policy ES1(a)-(c) (eNP2), Policy GA1 (eNP2), Policy GA2 (eNP2), Policy EE8 (eNP2)

Judgments cited: Bedford Borough Council v. SSCLG [2013] EWHC 2847; R. (Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2018] EWCA Civ 2069

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.