®Planning appeal decision
Sunningdale Lodden, GILLINGHAM, SP8 4JY
demolish existing two-storey house and replace with new two-storey dwelling
- Authority
- Dorset
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- residential · Minor Dwellings
- Inspector
- Rogers J
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the proposed development would be appropriately located in respect of flood risk
- the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area
- the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupants of No 100, with particular reference to privacy
What decided it
The proposed development would not be appropriately located in respect of flood risk, contrary to Policy 3 of the Local Plan and Chapter 14 of the Framework, which provides a clear reason for refusal under paragraph 11di of the Framework despite the housing delivery test falling below 75%.
The significant weight given to conflict with flood risk policies under the Framework's protective policies for areas at risk of flooding outweighed the moderate weight given to conflicts with character and living conditions policies and the social, economic and environmental benefits of the development, with the presumption in favour of sustainable development not applying due to the clear reason for refusal on flood risk grounds.
Framework references: 167, 38, 11
Plan policies cited: Policy 3, Policy 4, Policy 7, Policy 24, Policy 25, Policy 24 of the Neighbourhood Plan
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.