Town Planner Pro
Free trial
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Allowed13 October 20223297751

Land North East of Bury St Edmunds, Bury St Edmunds, IP31 2SJ

Planning appeal 3297751 at Land North East of Bury St Edmunds, Bury St Edmunds, IP31 2SJ (West Suffolk) was allowed on 13 October 2022 by Inspector Fagan N, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety or severe residual cumulative impacts on the local and strategic transport network contrary to relevant development plan policies and NPPF paragraph 111 (essentially as expressed in the LPA's first putative refusal reason).

Hybrid application: outline (all matters reserved except access) for up to 1,375 dwellings, access, open space, local centre, primary school and associated infrastructure; and full details for Phase 1 of 287 dwellings, garages, access roads, parking, open space and associated works

Authority
West Suffolk
Appeal type
major · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Inquiry
Development
residential · Major dwellings
Inspector
Fagan N

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety or severe residual cumulative impacts on the local and strategic transport network contrary to relevant development plan policies and NPPF paragraph 111 (essentially as expressed in the LPA's first putative refusal reason)
  • With reference to this, in terms of both the improvements to local highway junctions (including the A14 and congested local road junctions) and walking and cycling improvements to the site, what are the exact areas of disagreement between the parties and why: i.e. which improvements required by WSC/SCC is the appellant contesting and why?
  • How and when highway/transport improvements would be delivered – i.e., via S106 agreement or otherwise, including for the full and outline parts of the proposed development
  • Whether the leisure centre (indoor sports provision) contribution of £870,513 is justified and meets the legal tests in CIL Reg 122(2)
  • Whether the libraries contribution of £297,000 is justified and meets the legal tests in CIL Reg 122(2)

What decided it

The resolution, through negotiation and a completed S106 agreement, of the previously outstanding highway impact and CIL-compliant infrastructure funding objections, leaving the scheme in full accordance with the development plan and NPPF.

the hybrid proposal scheme would comply with the development plan when considered as a whole, and there are no other material considerations which outweigh such compliance

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Policy CS1Policy CS2Policy CS3Policy CS7Policy CS8Policy CS11Policy CS14Policy BV2Policy BV6Policy DM42Policy DM45Policy GB1Policy GB2Policy DM2Policy DM3Policy GB4Policy GB5Policy DM20Policy DM6Policy DM7Policy DM12Policy DM13Policy DM14Policy DM22Policy DM32Policy DM11Policy DM46
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 11Paragraph 56Paragraph 111Paragraph 170Paragraph 178Paragraph 179Paragraph 105Paragraph 110

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.

Appeals plan, £15 a month

With an account

What an account adds to this decision

13 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 West Suffolk

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

  1. Dismissed2 July 20266006355
    Laurel Farm, Sandy Drove, Lakenheath, IP27 9GT
  2. Allowed29 June 20266007055
    All Saints Hotel, The Street, Fornham St Genevieve, Bury St Edmunds, IP28 6JQ
  3. Allowed17 June 20266005559
    Land Opposite 'Mandarin' and Adj to South View, Wilde St, Beck Row, Mildenhall, IP28 8BL
  4. Allowed17 June 20266004217
    The Coal Yard, Wilde Street, Beck Row, IP28 8BL
  5. Allowed15 April 20266002651
    Depden Hall, The Green, Depden, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, IP29 4BY

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.