Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed3 December 20253349473

Clints Quarry , A595 Bothel to Redmain , Moota , Cumbria , CA13 0QE

the winning and working of limestone

Authority
Lake District
Appeal type
ldc · Lawful Development Certificate
Procedure
Hearing
Development
minerals-waste · Mineral working
Inspector
Savage M

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • The main issue of Appeal A is whether the Authority’s decision to refuse the application was well founded. This will turn on whether the 1974 planning permission was begun prior to 20 November 1979.
  • Whether, if I find the 1974 permission was not implemented, it is possible to determine the conditions for the 1966 permission alone.

What decided it

For Appeal A, the appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the 1974 permission was begun before 20 November 1979; for Appeal B, the Inspector could not rule out an adverse effect on the integrity of the Special Area of Conservation and found no imperative reasons of overriding public interest to justify that harm.

the public interest benefits of the proposal (economic benefits, job support and reduced transport mileage) did not outweigh the adverse impacts of the proposed development upon the conservation aims of the Habitats Directive, so the benefits did not justify those adverse impacts and the IROPI test was not met

Framework references: 190

Judgments cited: David (Thomas)(Porthcawl) Ltd v Penybont Rural District Council [1972] 3 All E.R. 1092, CA; R (Park Pharmacy Trust) v Plymouth City Council [2008] EWHC 445 (Admin); Maximums Networks Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2018] EWHC 1933 (Admin); Foster, R (on the application of) v Oldham MBC & Pugmanor Properties Ltd [1999] EWHC Admin 774; Test Valley Borough Council v Fiske [2024] EWCA Civ 1541; CG Fry & Son Limited v (1) Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (2) Somerset Council [2024] EWCA Civ 730; R (Wilkinson) v South Hams DC [2016] EWHC 1860

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.