®Planning appeal decision
Maidenhead Office Park, Westacott Way, Maidenhead, SL6 3QH
Planning appeal 3336224 at Maidenhead Office Park, Westacott Way, Maidenhead, SL6 3QH (Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead) was dismissed on 5 July 2024 by Inspector Sabu R, following an inquiry. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt.
described as, ‘outline application for access only to be considered at this stage with all other matters to be reserved for demolition of the existing buildings and redevelopment of the site for industrial and logistics use within Use Classes E(G)(iii), B2 and B8, with surface car parking, landscaping, and associated works
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- employment-industrial · Other Major Developments
- Inspector
- Sabu R
- Postcode
- SL6 3QH
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt
- whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, would be clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal
What decided it
The other considerations relied on by the appellant did not clearly outweigh the substantial Green Belt harm, so very special circumstances were not established.
substantial weight attached to Green Belt harm (inappropriateness, spatial and visual openness harm, conflict with two Green Belt purposes) was not clearly outweighed by significant weight given to I&L need/economic benefits and moderate weight given to sustainability and biodiversity net gain, so the balance tipped against the proposal
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy QP5BLP Policy ED2
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 142Paragraph 143Paragraph 152Paragraph 154Paragraph 155Paragraph 85Paragraph 87
- Judgments
- Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin); R (on the application of Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster) and others) (Respondents) v North Yorkshire County Council (Appellant) [2020] UKSC 3
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 Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2024
- Allowed27 October 20266007126Grove Park Industrial Estate Waltham Road, White Waltham, Maidenhead, SL6 3JF
- Dismissed21 October 20266009694Land Adjacent to Stud Green Farm, Sturt Green, Holyport, SL62JH
- Dismissed4 September 202660092602 Island Cottages Stanwell Road, Horton, SL3 9PQ
- Notice upheld10 August 20263369085Land to the Side of 16 Halfway Houses, Maidenhead Road, Maidenhead, Berkshire, SL6 6PP
- Dismissed27 July 20266008948Land To The North of Stubbings Farm Cottages, Burchetts Green Road Burchetts Green, Windsor And Maidenhead, Maidenhead, SL6 6QT
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.