Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed25 January 20223278097

Land at Former Hatfield Aerodrome, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL4 0HP

Planning appeal 3278097 at Land at Former Hatfield Aerodrome, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL4 0HP (Hertfordshire County Council) was dismissed on 25 January 2022 by Inspector Woolcock J, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the development conflicts with policy to protect the Green Belt and the effects of the proposed development on the openness of the Green Belt and upon the purposes of including land within it.

the establishment of a new quarry on land at the former Hatfield Aerodrome, including new access to the A1057, aggregate processing plant, concrete batching plant and other ancillary facilities, together with the importation of inert fill material to restore the mineral workings

Appeal type
other · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Inquiry
Development
minerals-waste · Mineral working
Inspector
Woolcock J
Postcode
AL4 0HP

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the development conflicts with policy to protect the Green Belt and the effects of the proposed development on the openness of the Green Belt and upon the purposes of including land within it.
  • The effects of the proposed development on hydrogeology and bromate contamination of groundwater.
  • The effects of the proposed development on the local amenity of the area and the living conditions of nearby residents, with particular reference to dust, air quality and health, and noise and disturbance.
  • The effects of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, including cumulative effects.
  • Whether the effects of the proposed development on highway safety, flood risk, Public Rights of Way (PRoW), biodiversity, heritage assets or other matters weigh in the planning balance.
  • The need for sand and gravel, having regard to likely future demand for, and supply of, these minerals, along with the effects of the proposed development on employment and the economy.
  • If the development is inappropriate in the Green Belt, whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development.

What decided it

The harm by reason of inappropriateness in the Green Belt, together with other identified harms, was not clearly outweighed by the benefits of the scheme, so the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development did not exist.

the substantial harm to the Green Belt, together with harm to character, appearance and amenity, harm to the listed building's setting, and harm to pedestrian safety, was not clearly outweighed by the great-weight benefits of aggregate supply, economic/employment contribution, biodiversity net gain and PRoW improvements, so very special circumstances were not established

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
MLP Policy 1MLP Policy 2MLP Policy 3MLP Policy 4MLP Policy 7MLP Policy 9MLP Policy 11MLP Policy 12MLP Policy 13MLP Policy 14MLP Policy 15MLP Policy 16
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 145Paragraph 150Paragraph 188Paragraph 202Paragraph 55
Judgments
Bernard Wheatcroft Ltd v SoSE (1982) 43 P.&C.R. 233; R (Holborn Studios Ltd) v LB Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin); R (on the application of Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster) and others) v North Yorkshire County Council [2020] UKSC 3

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 applied

The 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

67 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision
An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter
Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.
Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app
Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.
Start your free trial

More decisions in Hertfordshire County Council

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022

  1. Allowed12 December 20243345847
    Cs Recycling , Coopers Lane, Potters Bar, EN6 4NE
  2. Unknown20 March 20263376105
    Land Around Brook House , Brook Drive, Radlett, WD7 8ET
  3. Unknown12 March 20263369840
    Appeal 3369840
  4. Unknown3 March 20263363792
    Appeal 3363792
  5. Unknown25 February 20263376847
    Appeal 3376847

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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.