®Planning appeal decision
Land West of Highland Brow, Galgate, LA2 0NG
Planning appeal 3326187 at Land West of Highland Brow, Galgate, LA2 0NG (Lancaster City Council) was dismissed on 3 May 2024 by Inspector McDonald K, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: Whether the site is suitable for the proposed development, having regard to the Council's spatial strategy.
a residential development for up to 108 dwellings with access considered
- Authority
- Lancaster City Council
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Major dwellings
- Inspector
- McDonald K
- Postcode
- LA2 0NF
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the site is suitable for the proposed development, having regard to the Council's spatial strategy.
- Whether the proposed development would be in a suitable location with regard to local and national policies relating to flood risk.
- The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.
- Whether the proposal could satisfactorily accommodate the quantum of development proposed, having regard to the effect on the living conditions of existing residents.
- The effect of the proposal on the strategic road network.
- Whether the proposal would support active and sustainable modes of travel.
What decided it
The failure to satisfy the flood risk sequential test, which disengaged the tilted balance and carried overriding substantial weight against the proposal.
The substantial weight given to housing and affordable housing delivery, together with significant and limited weight for highway betterment, drainage betterment, character/appearance and socio-economic benefits, was outweighed by the overriding substantial weight attributed to the failure of the flood risk sequential test.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy SP2Policy SP3Policy DM4Policy SG1Policy SP8Policy DM33Policy DM34Policy T3Policy DM46Policy DM27Policy DM29Policy DM30Policy DM57Policy SP10Policy DM60Policy DM61Policy DM63
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 173
- Judgments
- Wathen-Fayed v SSLUHC [2023] EWHC 92 (Admin); Substation Action Save East Suffolk Ltd v SSESNZ [2024] EWCA Civ 12; Mead Realisations Limited and Redrow Homes Limited v SSLUHC [2024] EWHC 279 (Admin)
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 Lancaster City Council
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024
- Dismissed27 October 20266012921Land Off Deer Park Lane, Hornby, Lancaster, LA2 8LF
- Dismissed14 August 20266007131Angel's Field, Swarthdale, Birkland Barrow Road, Nether Kellet, LA6 1FJ
- Allowed12 August 20266007210Land at Arna Wood Lane, Aldcliffe, LA2 0AE
- Dismissed17 June 20266006041Appletree Basin, Quernmore Brow, Lancaster, LA2 0QP
- Allowed11 June 20266006298Land at Back Lane, Borwick, LA6 1JT
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.