®Planning appeal decision
Land at Wood Farm, Stanton Lane, Ellistown, LE67 1FF
Planning appeal 3274706 at Land at Wood Farm, Stanton Lane, Ellistown, LE67 1FF (Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council) was dismissed on 22 November 2021 by Inspector Vyse J, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the main issue in this case relates to the effect of the employment development, including associated infrastructure, on the character and appearance of the area, including the National and Charnwood Forests.
Hybrid application seeking outline permission for the erection of buildings for storage and distribution uses (Class B8) and general industry (Class B2) and associated infrastructure including the formation of a new access (all matters reserved except for access) and the demolition of existing farmstead, and full planning permission for the erection of two replacement farm managers' dwellings and associated agriculture buildings and structures
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- employment-industrial · Other Major Developments
- Inspector
- Vyse J
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the main issue in this case relates to the effect of the employment development, including associated infrastructure, on the character and appearance of the area, including the National and Charnwood Forests
What decided it
The comparative scale of landscape/character harm against the weight of economic and employment benefits determined the differing outcomes: in Appeal A the harm outweighed the benefits, while in Appeal B the benefits outweighed the lesser harm.
For Appeal A the considerable economic, employment and other benefits were not sufficient to outweigh the significant landscape harm and heritage asset loss, so the development plan conflict prevailed and the appeal was dismissed; for Appeal B the substantial package of benefits, particularly the economic and employment benefits, outweighed the significant (but lesser) landscape harm and heritage asset loss, so the appeal was allowed.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy DM4Policy DM20Policy 21Policy 22Policy 24
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 174Paragraph 83Paragraph 152Paragraph 110Paragraph 57
- Judgments
- Britton v SoS for the Environment [1997] JPL 617
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in Hinckley and Bosworth
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2021
- Dismissed27 July 20266008411Regent Court, Regent Street, Hinckley, LE10 0AD
- Allowed28 May 20266002758Land at Crabtree Farm, Hinckley Road, Barwell, Leicestershire, LE9 8DB
- Allowed28 May 20266002757Land at Crabtree Farm, Hinckley Road, Barwell, Leicestershire, LE9 8DB
- Allowed28 May 20266002756Land at Crabtree Farm, Hinckley Road, Barwell, Leicestershire, LE9 8DB
- Allowed28 May 20266002755Land at Crabtree Farm, Hinckley Road, Barwell, Leicestershire, LE9 8DB
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.