Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed19 February 20253344832

The Cross Keys, 201 Castle Hill Road, Totternhoe, DUNSTABLE, LU6 2DA

changes to the car park, access arrangements and pub garden for the Cross Keys PH and the erection of 1 No. single storey dwelling on land to the rear of the PH and part of the garden of No. 203 Castle Hill Road

Authority
Central Bedfordshire
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector
Gee R

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • whether the proposed development would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and any relevant development plan policies
  • the effect on the openness and purposes of the Green Belt
  • the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area
  • whether the proposal would preserve the setting of the Grade II listed building known as The Cross Keys
  • whether the future occupiers of the proposed development would be likely to experience acceptable living conditions, with particular regard to noise and disturbance
  • the effect of the proposed development on the viability of the public house, known as The Cross Keys
  • the integrity of habitats sites
  • the effect of the proposal upon biodiversity
  • if the proposal would be inappropriate development, whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify it

What decided it

The proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt with substantial harm to openness and purposes, fails to preserve the setting of a Grade II listed building, would not provide acceptable living conditions for future occupiers due to noise, and cannot secure necessary ecological mitigation, with public benefits insufficient to outweigh these harms.

The limited public benefits of housing delivery and economic activity do not clearly outweigh the substantial harm to Green Belt openness and purposes, the less than substantial harm to the setting of the Grade II listed building, the unacceptable living conditions for future occupiers, the harm to the viability of the existing public house, and the failure to secure ecological mitigation.

Framework references: 11, 143, 154, 155, 110

Plan policies cited: Policy SP4, Policy HQ1, Policy HQ8, Policy HE3, Policy EE2, Policy EE3, Policy TP1, Policy T4, Policy T5, Policy T8

Judgments cited: Bernard Wheatcroft Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment [JPL, 1982, P37]; Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (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.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.