Planning appeal decision
Finsbury Court, Parkside, Waltham Cross, EN8 7TH
described on the Council’s
- Authority
- Broxbourne Borough Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- residential · Major dwellings
- Inspector
- Bristow T
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether or not the proposal would make appropriate provision for parking
- the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area
- whether or not the proposal would contribute appropriately towards infrastructure provision
What decided it
The Inspector's conclusion that the scheme complied with the development plan on parking and character/appearance and that the disputed financial contributions failed the necessity/relatedness tests, leaving no planning objection to the grant of permission.
Framework references: 11, 34, 55, 56, 57, 58, 68, 74, 104, 105, 130, 174, 180
Plan policies cited: Policy TM5, Policy DSC1, Policy INF1, Policy PO1, Policy NEB1, Policy NEB3, Policy NEB4, Policy TM4
Judgments cited: Aberdeen City and Shire Strategic Development Planning Authority v Elsick Development Company Limited (Scotland) [2017] UKSC 66
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.
®