®Planning appeal decision
Land at National Society for Epilepsy, Chesham Lane, Chalfont St Peter, Buckinghamshire, HP8 4AD
Outline planning application for the development of up to 975 homes including affordable housing (Use Class C3), up to 75 care accommodation beds (Use Class C2), new primary school provision, local retail and employment provision (Use Class E), reprovision of sport pitches, landscaping, car parking provision and associated works. Summary of Recommendation: The appeal be approved and planning permission granted ____________________________________________________________ 1
- Authority
- Buckinghamshire Council - Chiltern Area *
- Appeal type
- major · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Inquiry
- Development
- residential · Major dwellings
- Inspector
- Coffey L
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- Character and appearance, including the setting of the Chiltern National Landscape (NL)
- Green Belt
- Sustainable location
- Highway network
- Flooding
- Business case
- Housing
- Football pitches
- Heritage
- Economic benefits
- Best and most versatile (BMV) agricultural land
- Other matters
What decided it
The substantial and cumulative benefits of the proposal—particularly the delivery of market and affordable housing and the Epilepsy Society's business case—clearly outweighed the Green Belt harm and other identified harms, establishing very special circumstances.
The substantial benefits of the proposal (market and affordable housing, older persons housing, the appellant's business case, public transport/sustainability improvements and Golden Rules compliance) were found to clearly outweigh the substantial Green Belt harm, landscape and visual harm, heritage harm and other lesser harms, such that very special circumstances existed and the presumption in favour of sustainable development applied.
Framework references: 11, 49, 57, 58, 88, 115, 116, 117, 118, 153, 154, 156, 158, 159, 181, 182, 187, 189, 212, 215
Plan policies cited: Core Strategy Policy CS1, Core Strategy Policy CS2, Core Strategy Policy CS4, Core Strategy Policy CS8, Core Strategy Policy CS22 part b, Core Strategy Policy CS25, Core Strategy Policy CS28, Local Plan Policy GB2, Local Plan Policy GB21, Local Plan Policy GB30
Judgments cited: R(Thakeham Village Action) v Horsham DC [2014] EWHC 67
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.