Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed12 June 20253353786

Nether Birchitt Farm, Sheffield Road, Dronfield, S18 2GD

1no new dwelling on site adjacent opposite dwelling owned by applicant's parents. Proposal to build dwelling to allow family to be close by to parents - to assist with care due to ill health

Authority
North East Derbyshire District Council
Appeal type
minor · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Written Representations
Development
residential · Minor Dwellings
Inspector
Williams K

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • the effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area including the setting of designated and non-designated heritage assets
  • whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt having regard to the Framework and the effect of the development on the openness and purposes of the Green Belt
  • whether it has been demonstrated that the appeal site is suitable for the proposed development having regard to past coal mining activity
  • whether has been demonstrated that the proposal would not be harmful to highway safety, with particular regard to the suitability of the access
  • whether it has been demonstrated that the proposal would not harm the ecology and biodiversity of the site
  • if the development is inappropriate, 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 the development

What decided it

The proposal is inappropriate development in the Green Belt that would cause less than substantial but considerable harm to the setting of Grade II listed buildings, and these harms together with unresolved concerns regarding coal mining, highway safety and ecology are not outweighed by any public or personal benefits, such that very special circumstances do not exist.

The substantial weight attached to inappropriateness and moderate loss of Green Belt openness, combined with significant weight given to harm to designated heritage assets and potential serious harm from unaddressed coal mining, highway safety and ecological risks, together with moderate weight for harm to character and appearance, were not outweighed by the modest public benefits of one dwelling and economic activity during construction, nor by the personal circumstances of the appellant's family care needs.

Framework references: 11, 143, 153, 154, 155, 187, 196, 207, 212, 213, 215

Plan policies cited: Policy SDC6, Policy SD12, Policy SDC14, Policy SS1, Policy SS10, Policy SCD4, Policy ID3, Policy D1, Policy D3, Policy ENV1

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.