Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed25 March 20253353544

Land at Oakfield House, Woburn Lane, Aspley Guise, Milton Keynes , MK17 8JN

1 Custom self build retirement 1.5 storey dwelling and tractor shed

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

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and relevant development plan policies including the effect of the proposal on the openness and purposes of the Green Belt
  • the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area with particular regard to the effect on the Aspley Guise Conservation Area (AGCA)
  • whether sufficient information has been provided to consider the effect of the proposed development on archaeological remains
  • the effect of the proposed development on highway safety, including any required works to vegetation on the boundary with the highway
  • whether sufficient information has been provided to show that the site would be suitable for residential development with regard to ground contamination
  • 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 proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt that would cause less than substantial harm to the Aspley Guise Conservation Area, and the public benefits do not clearly outweigh this harm or constitute very special circumstances.

The harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and harm to the designated heritage asset was not clearly outweighed by the benefits of one new dwelling of sustainable construction and elderly persons accommodation, and the public benefits do not outweigh the less than substantial harm to the conservation area.

Framework references: 11, 70, 142, 143, 154, 155, 156, 157, 214, 215

Plan policies cited: Policy SP4, Policy HQ1, Policy HE3, Policy HE1, Policy T2, Policy EE4, Policy CC8

Judgments cited: Wood v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2015] EWCA Civ 195; Lee Valley RPA V Epping Forest DC & Valley Grown Nurseries Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 404

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.