Planning appeal decision
Yeoman Stud, Moats Tye Livery, Moats Tye, Combs, Stowmarket, Suffolk, IP14 2EY
Planning appeal 3281395 at Yeoman Stud, Moats Tye Livery, Moats Tye, Combs, Stowmarket, Suffolk, IP14 2EY (Mid Suffolk District Council) was dismissed on 25 July 2022 by Inspector Simpson L, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the site would be a suitable location for the proposed development with particular regard to its accessibility to services and facilities.
described on the planning application form as ‘Proposed residential dwelling - in outline’
- Authority
- Mid Suffolk District Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Simpson L
- Postcode
- IP14 2EY
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the site would be a suitable location for the proposed development with particular regard to its accessibility to services and facilities
- The effect of the proposed development on the setting of a nearby Grade II listed building, Whitehouse Farmhouse
- Whether the proposed dwelling would provide a suitable standard of accommodation to future occupiers with specific regard to its proximity to existing development within the surrounding area
What decided it
The less than substantial harm to the setting of Whitehouse Farmhouse, a Grade II listed building, which the Inspector found would not be outweighed by the modest public benefits of the proposed single dwelling, providing a clear reason for refusal under Framework Paragraph 11d(i).
The tilted balance under Framework Paragraph 11d was engaged due to out-of-date countryside policies, but the heritage protection policies in the Framework provided a clear reason for refusal; the less than substantial harm to the listed building setting, afforded great weight, outweighed the modest public benefits of housing delivery and economic support, which could only be attributed moderate weight.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy CS1Policy CS2Policy H7Policy H17Policy HB1Policy FC1Policy FC1.1Policy H10Policy LP01
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 80Paragraph 199Paragraph 202Paragraph 11
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 Mid Suffolk District Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022
- Dismissed15 October 20266012038The Stables, Bobby Hill, Wattisfield, IP22 1NL
- Dismissed14 September 202660102811 Nursery Cottages, Barham, Ipswich, IP6 0PR
- Dismissed8 September 20266010228Land East of 52 Exeter Road, Claydon, Ipswich, IP6 0BP
- Dismissed2 September 20263359620Keytons Pit Newton Road, Sudbury, CO10 0PY
- Quashed On Legal Grounds1 September 20263344278Walnut Meadown, Back Lane, Baylham, Ipswich, IP6 8LE
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.
®