Planning appeal decision
16 Selborne Avenue, HAVANT, Hampshire, PO9 4PX
‘a two-storey new build dwelling to end of existing terrace’
- Authority
- Havant Borough Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Chamberlain G
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the appeal site is a suitable location for the proposal, having regard to policies concerned with development in areas at risk of flooding
- The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area
- The effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupants of 16 Selborne Avenue and 32 Overton Crescent, with reference to outlook, sunlight and privacy, and future occupants with reference to the size and configuration of outdoor amenity space
What decided it
The appellant failed to demonstrate that sequentially preferable sites were not reasonably available and appropriate, thereby failing the sequential test required by Policy CS15 and the Framework, which provides a clear reason for refusal that engages the exception to the tilted balance.
the significant harm arising from flood risk policy non-compliance, character and appearance harm, and living conditions harm outweighed the moderate cumulative benefits of housing delivery and economic support, which did not constitute material considerations indicating the proposal should be determined otherwise than in accordance with the development plan
Framework references: 162, 160, 130, 130(f), 11d)
Plan policies cited: Policy CS15 of the Havant Borough Core Strategy 2011, Policy CS16 of the Havant Borough Core Strategy 2011, Policy LP2 of the Havant Borough Local Plan (Allocations) 2014, Borough Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document
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.
®