®Planning appeal decision
Land to the east of Moorfield, Peach Grove, Andover, SP11 7EP
erection of a self-build residential dwelling and associated hard & soft landscaping
- Authority
- Test Valley Borough Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Sutton A
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the appeal site is a suitable location for residential development, having regard for the spatial strategy of the development plan
- The effect of the proposal on the integrity of protected habitats
- The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area
- Whether the proposal would provide a suitable access having regard to highway safety
What decided it
The proposal's conflict with Policy COM2 due to its location outside the settlement boundary in an unsuitable location for residential development, combined with the inability to demonstrate that the development would not have a significant adverse effect on the integrity of protected habitats.
The limited benefits of housing supply, self-build provision, and local economic benefits were outweighed by the conflict with the spatial strategy of the development plan and the significant adverse effect on protected habitats
Framework references: 11, 182
Plan policies cited: Policy COM2, Policy E5, Policy E8, Policy E1, Policy E2, Policy T1
Judgments cited: Bernard Wheatcroft Ltd v SSE [JPL, 1982, P37]
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.