Planning appeal decision
Millers Paddock, Broomfallen Road, Scotby, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA4 8DE
Planning appeal 3317287 at Millers Paddock, Broomfallen Road, Scotby, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA4 8DE (Carlisle City Council *) was dismissed on 5 January 2024 by Inspector Hockenhull H, following a hearing. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the effect of the proposal on highway safety with particular regard to users of the public right of way.
change of use of land to residential for a single family group comprising siting of 1 no. mobile home, 3 no. touring caravans, 1 no. utility room, 1 no. storage shed, 1 no. dog kennel, formation of hardstanding and installation of sewage treatment plant (part retrospective)
- Authority
- Carlisle City Council *
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Minor traveller and caravan pitches
- Inspector
- Hockenhull H
- Postcode
- CA4 8DE
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the effect of the proposal on highway safety with particular regard to users of the public right of way
- whether the proposed development would result in significant effects, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects, on the integrity of the River Eden Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
- whether there are other material considerations which outweigh the conflicts with the development plan and any other identified harm resulting from the appeal proposal
What decided it
The identified harm to highway safety and the likely significant adverse effect on the integrity of the River Eden SAC outweighed the benefits of the scheme, including the need for Gypsy and Traveller pitches and the appellant's personal circumstances.
the benefits of the scheme (need for Gypsy sites, lack of alternative sites, personal circumstances and best interests of the children) were outweighed by the harm to highway safety and to the integrity of the River Eden SAC
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy HO11Policy SP6Policy G13
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 115Paragraph 180Paragraph 186
- Judgments
- Smith v SSLUHC & Ors [2022] EWCA 31 October 2022
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 appliedThe 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.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in Carlisle City Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024
- Dismissed9 May 20233311702Land to the Rear of 5-8 Sewell Place, Carlisle, CA2 4QR
- Allowed19 July 20223284915Glen Croft, West Hall, Brampton, CA8 2BS
- Planning permission granted2 June 20213248752Old Mothers Meadow, Opposite Irthing Mill, Irthington, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA6 4NS
- Dismissed12 February 20243320644Land Adjacent to Geltsdale Avenue, Durranhill Road, Carlisle, Cumbria, CA1 2RL
- Dismissed11 January 202433265421 Berrymoor Rd, Brampton, CA81DH
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.
®