®Planning appeal decision
Twinkle Toes, Wilne Road, Sawley, Derbyshire, NG10 3AP
Without planning permission the unauthorised material change of use of the land from an equestrian use to a mixed use, comprising of the operation of an equestrian enterprise and the siting of a motor home and wooden lodge on the land for residential purposes. The unauthorised storage of domestic items and a boat on the land in connection with the unauthorised residential use of the land
- Authority
- Erewash Borough Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- residential · Change of use
- Inspector
- Willows P
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the development is inappropriate in the Green Belt, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies.
- The effect of the development on the openness of the Green Belt and its purposes.
- The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the Sawley Conservation Area and the wider rural landscape.
- Whether the development complies with local and national policies relating to flood risk.
- Whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, including any need for the development and the personal circumstances of those living at the site, so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the development.
What decided it
The cumulative harm to the Green Belt, landscape character, the conservation area and flood risk policy was not clearly outweighed by the benefits and personal circumstances put forward, so very special circumstances were not established.
Substantial weight given to Green Belt harm, together with limited harm to character/appearance and the conservation area and clear conflict with flood risk policy, was not clearly outweighed by the significant weight attached to the pony party enterprise's benefits, the minor economic benefit, and the limited weight given to the housing benefit, so the appeal was dismissed.
Framework references: 153, 154, 155, 143, 176
Plan policies cited: Policy GB1, Policy 3, Policy EV16, Policy 10, Policy 1, Policy DC7
Judgments cited: Burdle & Williams v SSE & New Forest DC [1972] 1 WLR 1207; Beach v SSETR & Runnymede BC [2001] WHC 381 (Admin)
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.