®Planning appeal decision
Land at field adjacent to Hebborns Yard, Bicester Road, Kidlington, OX5 2PX
Without planning permission, the material change of use of the land from use for agriculture to a mixed use comprising the siting of a caravan(s) for residential use and the storage of showground apparatus/rides, machinery, vehicles, trailers and equipment and associated operational development to form hardstanding
- Authority
- Cherwell District Council
- Appeal type
- enforcement · Enforcement Notice
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- caravan-gypsy · Change of use
- Inspector
- Madge M
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Whether the development is inappropriate in the Green Belt
- If it is inappropriate in the Green Belt, its effect on openness
- Whether the development undermines the Green Belt purpose of safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
- The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the countryside
- The effect of the development in terms of flood risk
- Whether the development is intentional unauthorised development
- Whether harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, would be outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the necessary very special circumstances required to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt
What decided it
The finding that the reduced area of land constituted 'grey belt' land meeting all the criteria in paragraph 155 of the Framework, so that its development was not inappropriate in the Green Belt.
The harm from developing all of the land (inappropriate Green Belt development, attracting substantial weight) clearly outweighed the supporting factors, but for the reduced area the moderate weight given to the unmet need for Travelling Showpeople sites and the significant weight given to the paragraph 11(d) tilted balance outweighed the limited, condition-controllable visual harm and negligible weight against intentional unauthorised development, so permission was granted for the reduced area only.
Framework references: 11, 110, 115, 143, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157
Plan policies cited: Policy ESD14, Policy ESD6, Policy BSC6, Policy ESD13, Policy ESD15, Policy ENV1
Judgments cited: Burdle v SSE [1972] 1 WLR 1207
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.