Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed25 March 20253353544

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

Planning appeal 3353544 at Land at Oakfield House, Woburn Lane, Aspley Guise, Milton Keynes , MK17 8JN (Central Bedfordshire) was dismissed on 25 March 2025 by Inspector Bowden N, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: 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.

1 Custom self build retirement 1.5 storey dwelling and tractor shed

Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector
Bowden N
Postcode
MK17 8JN

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.

What the Inspector cited

Development plan policies
Policy SP4Policy HQ1Policy HE3Policy HE1Policy T2Policy EE4Policy CC8
National Planning Policy Framework
Paragraph 11Paragraph 70Paragraph 142Paragraph 143Paragraph 154Paragraph 155Paragraph 156Paragraph 157Paragraph 214Paragraph 215
Judgments
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

How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.

See how each was applied

The decision letter

Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.

With an account

What an account adds to this decision

38 other decided appeals within two kilometres of this site. In the app every dot opens its decision, and its letter wherever one was published, and you can draw your own site to see what has been decided around it.AllowedDismissedSplitThis decision
An appeal decision in the app, with the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out beside the letter
Every letter, there to read. We pick out the main issues, the policies and the judgments cited, so you can work through the letter faster.
Searching the full text of appeal decision letters in the app
Search inside every letter. By words or by meaning, filtered by authority, outcome, appeal type and procedure, with every locatable decision on the map and the Inspector named on each.
Start your free trial

More decisions in Central Bedfordshire

The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2025

  1. Dismissed29 October 20266009734
    Whitewood Corner, 7 Drove Road, Gamlingay, Sandy, SG19 2HT
  2. Allowed15 October 20266009682
    Land West Of Hurricane Avenue, Lower Stondon, SG16 6NW
  3. Dismissed15 September 20266007334
    Hillcrest, Chalton, Luton, LU4 9UB
  4. Allowed4 September 20266007202
    2 Park Farm, Park Road, Westoning, MK45 5LA
  5. Dismissed7 August 20266007254
    Wheatsheaf Barn, Mount Pleasant, Aspley Guise, MK178JZ

The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; 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 appeal around it, with its letter to read and the main issues, policies and judgments cited picked out.