®Planning appeal decision
Land at Gomm Valley, Gomm Road, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP10 8HB
-hybrid application consisting of a phased delivery of: full planning application for construction of 79 dwellings (Class C3) including associated vehicular access, areas of open space, ecological enhancements, hard and soft landscaping, and associated infrastructure. Outline application for 4 custom-build units within Parcel 1 and up to 461 dwellings (Class C3), a 1FE primary school and early years provision, up to 1.4 hectares of employment land to provide flexible floorspace of Class E(g), B2 and B8 uses and up to 201m² of community floorspace (Class F2) within Parcels 2-8 together with ecological enhancements, green open spaces, hard and soft landscaping and associated highways and drainage infrastructure (with matters reserved as shown in the Application Boundary Plan 21020 S202)
- Authority
- Buckinghamshire Council - Wycombe Area *
- Appeal type
- other · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Unknown
- Inspector
- Woodward M
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The effects of the proposal on highway safety and capacity.
- The effects of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, with particular regard to landscape and visual effects.
- Whether the scheme would achieve a well-designed place, having regard to its design attributes, and the living conditions of potential future occupiers of the proposed development.
- The suitability of the proposal having regard to accessibility, specifically the provision of wheelchair user dwellings.
- Biodiversity effects of the proposal, including on ancient woodland, having regard to mitigation and enhancement.
What decided it
The unacceptable impact of the proposal on highway safety and capacity at the A40 corridor and Gomm Road junction, arising from insufficiently robust traffic modelling, was the decisive factor.
The very substantial harm from unacceptable highway safety and capacity impacts, together with limited-weight conflict on wheelchair accessibility, were not outweighed by the significant and great weight benefits of housing, affordable housing, the school, employment, custom-build plots and biodiversity enhancements, such that the proposal conflicted with the development plan as a whole and the material considerations did not indicate a decision otherwise.
Framework references: 114, 115, 135, 138, 139, 186
Plan policies cited: Policy HW6, Policy CP7, Policy DM33, Policy DM2, Policy DM19, Policy CP9, Policy DM32, Policy DM35, Policy DM41, Policy DM22, Policy DM16, Policy CP10, Policy DM34, Policy DM11, Policy DM13, Policy DM14, Policy DM6
Judgments cited: Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin); Satnam Millenium v SSHCLG [2019] EWHC 2631 (Admin); MMF(UK) v SSCLG [2010] EWHC 3686 (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.