®Planning appeal decision
125, 127, 129, 131, 133 Promenade, Cheltenham, GL50 1NW
without planning permission, the retention of all marquees at 125, 127, 129, 131, and 133 Promenade, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire and associated fittings and chattels that facilitate the use of the marquees; the retention of the said marquees was refused permission under planning application 22/01373/FUL and the subsequent planning appeal to the Planning Inspectorate ref APP/B1605/W/23/3314132 was dismissed. A further application for planning permission under reference 23/01597/FUL has also been refused
- Authority
- Cheltenham Borough Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Development
- leisure-sport · Other minor developments
- Inspector
- Jones R
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- The effect of the marquees on the special interest of the adjacent listed buildings, with particular regard to their setting
- Whether the marquees preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Central Conservation Area
What decided it
The significant harm to the setting of Grade II* and Grade II listed buildings and the conservation area, which outweighed the economic benefits of the marquees given the availability of less harmful alternative outdoor dining and drinking facilities.
The economic benefits to the hospitality business and town centre vitality were outweighed by the less than substantial but significant harm to the setting of Grade II* and Grade II listed buildings and the character and appearance of the conservation area, particularly given the availability of less harmful alternatives.
Framework references: 212, 213, 215, 85, 90
Plan policies cited: CS Strategic Objective 1, CS Strategic Objective 2, CS Policy SD1, CS Policy SD8, CS Policy SD4, Policy D1 of the Cheltenham Plan
Judgments cited: R v Wicks [1997] JPL 1049; Miller-Mead v MHL [1963] 2 WLR 225; Ahmed v SSCLG & Hackney LBC [2014] EWCA Civ 566; R (oao Banghard) v Bedford BC [2017] EWHC 2391 (Admin); Mansell v Tonbridge and Malling BC & others [2017] EWCA Civ 1314
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.