Planning appeal decision
Hawkspare Ltd, Green Street Green Road, DARTFORD, DA2 8DP
- Authority
- Dartford Borough Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- employment-industrial · Change of use
- Inspector
- Steen A
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the development comprises inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and any relevant development plan policies
- The effect on the openness and purposes of the Green Belt
- The effect of the development on the intrinsic character and beauty of the landscape
- The effect of the mixed use of the land on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers with particular regard to light, pollution, noise and disturbance
- Whether the proposed works would preserve the Grade II listed buildings known as Clock House, Durham Cottage and House and The Forge Cottage and Grade II Scheduled Monument at the icehouse or their setting or any features of special architectural and historic interest (or significance) which they possess
- The effect of development on potable water supplies in the vicinity of the site
- The effect of traffic relating to the mixed use of the land on the safe and efficient operation of the highway network in the vicinity of the appeal site
- The effect of the mixed use of the land on users of public rights of way (PROW)
- The effect of the development on ecology and biodiversity
- Whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal
What decided it
the substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt, combined with the absence of a demonstrable unmet need for the development, meant the harms were not clearly outweighed so as to amount to very special circumstances
the substantial weight attributed to Green Belt harm, together with harm to landscape character, living conditions, heritage assets and potable water supplies, was not clearly outweighed by the considerable weight given to economic benefits and modest weight given to biodiversity improvements, so very special circumstances were not demonstrated and the balance tipped against the development
Framework references: 110, 115, 154, 155, 208, 212
Plan policies cited: Policy M1, Policy M2, Policy M5, Policy M6, Policy M12, Policy M14, Policy M15, Policy M16, Policy M18, Policy M20, Policy S4
Judgments cited: Miller-Mead v MHLG [1963] 2 WLR; Ferris v SSE [1989] 57 P&CR 127; Burdle & Williams v SSE & New Forest RDC [1972] 1 WLR 1207; Hertfordshire CC v SSCLG & Metal and Waste Recycling Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 1473; [2013] JPL 560
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.
®