®Planning appeal decision
Land to the East of Highgate Hill and South of Copthall Avenue, Hawkhurst, Kent, TR18 4LR
Planning appeal 3282908 at Land to the East of Highgate Hill and South of Copthall Avenue, Hawkhurst, Kent, TR18 4LR (Tunbridge Wells Borough Council) was allowed on 22 March 2022 by Inspector Manning J, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, including the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).
development of the site to provide 71 dwellings, alongside car parking, cycle parking, sustainable drainage, internal road network, public open space and associated landscaping and including the demolition of existing agricultural barn and garage and alterations to the existing access from Highgate Hill
- Authority
- Tunbridge Wells Borough Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Major dwellings
- Inspector
- Manning J
- Postcode
- TR18 4LR
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, including the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
- the effect of the proposal on heritage assets
- whether the scheme would result in harm to highway safety
- the extent of the Council's shortfall in respect of five-year housing land supply
- whether exceptional circumstances exist to warrant development in the AONB and whether it is in the public interest
What decided it
The substantial unmet need for market and affordable housing, combined with the Council's inability to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, outweighed the moderate AONB landscape harm and low-level heritage harm.
The benefits of meeting a substantial market and affordable housing need, together with biodiversity net gain and recreational enhancements, outweighed the moderate (reducing to moderate-to-low) landscape/AONB harm and the low-end less than substantial heritage harm, such that exceptional circumstances existed and the scheme was in the public interest under paragraph 177 of the NPPF.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy EN25Core Policy 4Core Policy 14Policy LP2Core Policy 3Policy AM1Core Policy 6Policy HD2Policy HD3Policy HD1(a)Policy HD1(b)Policy EN9
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 56Paragraph 176Paragraph 177Paragraph 202
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 Tunbridge Wells
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2022
- Allowed30 July 20266006922Larchmere House, Biddenden Road, Frittenden, Cranbrook, TN17 2EN
- Dismissed10 July 20266007903Porters Lodge, Ferndale Gardens, Royal Tunbridge Wells, TN2 3PL
- Allowed19 December 20253366410Uphill, New Pond Road, Benenden, Cranbrook, Kent, TN17 4EJ
- Dismissed15 July 20253352738Beacon Hotel, Tea Garden Lane, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Kent, TN3 9JH
- Dismissed2 July 20253361716The Meadows, Pastheap Farm Hastings Road, Pembury, Tunbridge Wells, TN2 4BL
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.