Key decisions

Mixed development

Design concerns have been held to ‘seriously’ outweigh the benefits of a regeneration scheme incorporating three towers in east London.

The scheme, comprising 435 flats and mixed uses, was proposed for a triangular site, sandwiched between a major highway and a river. The proposal was the final phase of a new neighbourhood development near the Olympic Park. As part of the scheme, the appellants proposed three 26-storey towers at each corner of the site, with additional built form of up to seven storeys between the blocks.

The inspector held that the 99-metre height of the proposed towers far exceeded an expected height of 18 metres, as set out in the area’s masterplan. He also noted the development plan policy stipulation that to be acceptable, tall buildings away from planned centres needed to demonstrate additional public benefits and be of an exceptionally good standard of design. In his assessment, the scheme did not achieve this standard. The identical brick-faced towers were too tall and close together, resulting in a formidable and overbearing mass, especially on the riverside environment, he held. He also found them lacking visual interest or any positive contribution to the skyline.

The inspector concluded that the attempt to optimise the site for housing had led to too many demands being placed on the limited external space. He noted that the main play area was separated from the rest of the scheme by an HGV access road, limiting its use. The inspector concluded that the scheme’s disadvantages “seriously” outweighed its benefits.

Inspector: Paul Jackson; Inquiry
DCS Number: 200-010-901

Comment: A number of cases in May have served to emphasise that the quality of architectural design is now a crucial factor in planning appeals. One of the most prominent cases was a mixed-use scheme including three towers, proposed for a site near the Olympic Park in London. The inspector judged that the towers would “overwhelm” nearby smaller scale development, and that the overall level of architectural design quality had not reached the threshold for tall buildings of “exceptionally good design”. Similar sentiments were echoed in another case in Greater Manchester, where an inspector dismissed the proposed redevelopment of a vacant site next to Old Trafford cricket ground. Here, the inspector said the proposal “would not deliver a high-quality, well-designed building and place”, and would cause “substantial” harm to local character and appearance. This inspector made particular reference to National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraphs 126 and 130, emphasising the importance of beauty and high-quality design in supporting his decision to dismiss the scheme. In a third case, for a scheme on a landmark site on the banks of the River Tyne in Newcastle city centre, the inspector was lukewarm about the proposed architectural design but was persuaded that the scheme’s overriding public benefits tipped the balance in the scheme’s favour.

Housing new build

Green belt and landscape harm were among the adverse impacts that ruled out a proposed 350-home scheme outside a Scottish city.

The scheme, which also included 30 per cent affordable housing, was proposed for a green belt site outside Edinburgh. Unable to determine the true extent of any housing land shortfall, the reporter applied the tilted balance, which requires a shortfall in five-year land supply to be weighed in favour of proposals which would help remedy the shortfall. But he concluded that the range of impacts, which also included poor accessibility other than by private car, and possible prejudice to an emerging local development plan, meant the scheme could not be considered as sustainable development.

The main parties held widely differing views on housing land requirements and housing land shortfall. On the one hand, the appellant claimed the housing land supply was just 1.54 years, based on an assessment of need underpinning an out-of-date regional plan. However, the council claimed it had an 8.7-year supply, based on its latest audit for its city plan area but for which there were no statutory housing supply targets other than the regional plan. The reporter was not persuaded by either case and referred to a recent Scottish Ministers decision accepting a reporter’s reasoning that it had not been possible to calculate whether or not there was a housing land supply shortfall. In this case, given the circumstances of the age of the regional plan, the tilted balance set out in Scottish Planning Policy paragraph 33, applying the presumption in favour of sustainable development, was engaged.

In the absence of certainty over housing shortfall or the severity of any such shortfall, the reporter held that he was unable to apply the concept of the “angle of tilt”, established by recent case law, where the angle of tilt is set by the extent of the housing shortfall. In a straightforward application of the tilted balance, the reporter judged in this case that a combination of the adverse impacts of the proposal significantly and demonstrably outweighed the scheme’s benefits.

Reporter: Mike Shiel; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-535

Comment: Two decisions by Scottish ministers in May are a reminder that the “tilted balance” triggered by housing land shortfalls has become a consideration in appeals north of the border as well as in England. In this case, the reporter was not persuaded that any possible housing land shortfall in the Edinburgh area justified a scheme which he said would have a detrimental landscape impact and would conflict with green belt policy. But in a second Scottish decision this month, ministers allowed a called-in application for 78 homes in Inverclyde. In that case, they found that the housing land shortfall meant the presumption in favour of development that contributes to sustainable development was a “significant” material consideration. While acknowledging the site’s location in the green belt, they decided the proposal would not undermine the purposes of the designation. Overall, they concluded that the adverse impacts of the proposal would not outweigh the benefits, and allowed the appeal.

Latest cases

Community facilities 

A proposed 28-storey tower block housing student accommodation in Manchester has been held to have a positive impact on area character.

The proposal for the purpose-built accommodation for 534 students in the city centre won the approval of an inspector, who held that it would be of landmark quality and that a need for the accommodation had been demonstrated. Although the council objected to the building’s impact on the area’s character, the inspector noted that the site lay in a regeneration area. In this location, the council’s development framework envisaged a building significantly taller than the 13-storey scheme previously granted planning permission, and other tall buildings had been constructed or consented nearby, he held. The site occupied a visually strategic location terminating the vista along a main road towards the city centre, where the aspirations of the framework required a landmark building, he observed. In his view, the height, slender triangular design and features such as a stepping down in scale at roof level would result in a building of landmark quality. The scheme would therefore have a positive effect on the area’s character and would cause no harm to the setting or significance of nearby listed buildings or an adjacent conservation area, he concluded.

The council claimed that the appellant had overestimated the need for more purpose-built student accommodation. However, the inspector held that the appellant company, as an experienced provider, had satisfied itself that there was an unmet and increasing quantitative need as well as a qualitative demand from growing numbers of international students. In his view, the site was in close proximity to the university campuses after taking account of walking distances and bus services. Any impact from the wind microclimate at street level on the safety and comfort of pedestrians and cyclists could be mitigated by proposed tree planting, he ruled. 

Inspector: John Braithwaite; Inquiry
DCS Number: 200-010-914

The substantial benefits of redeveloping hospital facilities in Sunderland have been held to outweigh any harm from demolishing existing buildings.

An inspector approved the redevelopment of the 1930s hospital buildings to provide NHS offices and a cafe. He found that the two blocks proposed for demolition, aside from their local connections to prominent individuals who contributed to the construction of the hospital and their main entrance portico, lacked any other historical or architectural significance. In coming to this conclusion, the inspector also noted there had been no objection to the proposals from conservation officers, and that Historic England had declined to list the buildings.

Taking into account the appellants' explanation of the constraints of re-use of the existing buildings, the inspector found it would not be reasonable to pursue their regeneration. In his view, there were substantial benefits to be gained from the proposed replacement of the blocks with fit-for-purpose hospital facilities. This, he judged, outweighed harm to the historic environment from demolition in national policy terms. 

In deciding to allow the appellant’s application for costs, the inspector identified a lack of objectivity in the council’s reasoning in its refusal of the proposal.

Inspector: Graham Wraight; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-531

A realistic fallback position has been held to justify the demolition of a historic building in a town in Cornwall.

 An inspector granted permission to replace the building, which he accepted contributed to the Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape world heritage site (WHS), with student accommodation. The inspector held there was a realistic fallback position that the existing building could be demolished under permitted development rights in any event.

As part of their appeal case, the appellants provided evidence that the property could be demolished under permitted development rights, supported by case law indicating that a fallback scenario can be a significant material consideration. 

The council countered this argument with claims that it could either list the building or issue an Article 4 direction to remove such permitted development rights. However, the inspector held there was little evidence that the council would pursue either option, and he concluded that the lawful fallback could realistically occur, attaching significant weight to it in his decision. Therefore, although the inspector judged that the loss of the appeal building would harm the WHS, he ruled this was likely to happen in any event and the appeal proposal therefore had a neutral effect on the WHS. 

Inspector: Tobias Gethin; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-469

 Housing new build 

The benefits of a proposed 1,000-home urban extension of a Berkshire town have been held to be sufficient to warrant its approval.

The secretary of state allowed the proposal, including a country park, on an allocated site at the edge of the town. He noted that the scheme comprised the major part of a site allocated in the council’s core strategy for 2,000 homes. The inspector had noted that the proposal did not comply in all respects with policy requirements for the site, as it did not provide one of the cycle routes sought in the site masterplan and it did not represent a single application for the wider site as required in the local plan. 

However, the secretary of state agreed with the inspector that suitable bus, cycle and pedestrian links would nonetheless be provided. He also agreed that, even without a single application for the entire allocation, the proposals would not prejudice the development of the remaining housing land and would deliver the necessary infrastructure in a timely manner.

The secretary of state was satisfied that potential harmful impacts on the landscape, biodiversity, veteran trees and ancient woodland could be satisfactorily addressed or mitigated at reserved matters stage. He emphasised that the final design should be of a high standard in accordance with government guidance. Giving weight to the benefits of delivering homes, including affordable and extra-care units, and a country park, the secretary of state agreed with his inspector that permission should be granted subject to conditions. He was content that a carefully worded pre-commencement condition would secure the delivery, maintenance and management of the country park.

Inspector: Lesley Coffey; Inquiry
DCS Number: 200-010-859

Unmet need for housing has been held to justify a 330-home scheme in a strategic gap between two Kent towns.

The council had refused planning permission for the scheme, which also included 40 per cent affordable homes, for grounds relating to the character and appearance of the area and the loss of agricultural land. However, it withdrew these grounds and chose not to defend its reason for refusal at appeal. The inspector therefore identified the main issue at the appeal as whether the site was in a suitable location for housing. This was in the context of a housing land shortfall, the age of strategic development plan policies and the withdrawal of an emerging local plan. 

In these circumstances, the inspector agreed with the council that the site’s location within a strategic gap carried limited weight. He held there would be no harm to the separate identity of the settlements given the barrier created by a raised railway embankment and an indicative masterplan showing open space along this side of the development.

The inspector identified some inevitable harm to the character and appearance of the area from development on greenfield land. However, he found that the site was well contained by existing housing development, the railway embankment and various trees and hedgerows, and therefore the development’s visual impact would be very localised. While this adverse effect and the loss of best and most versatile grade- two agricultural land weighed against the proposal, the inspector found this was outweighed by the significant benefit of housing.

Inspector: Michael Boniface; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-591

A plan to mitigate phosphate effects on an internationally protected wetland has been held to justify a 200-home scheme in Somerset.

The appellants secured permission for the scheme on fields outside a market town after the mitigation plan was approved by Natural England and the inspector. The site lay outside the development plan’s preferred direction of housing growth planned for local market towns. However, the inspector noted the council was unable to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, with more than 5,000 homes held up pending a solution to the problems of phosphates generated by housing development harming the Somerset Levels and Moors Ramsar protected site.

The appellant had submitted a fallow land strategy which would achieve nutrient neutrality using the council’s phosphate calculator, providing mitigation in the form of off-site land use change and fallowing of farmland. Natural England raised no objection to the development subject to the mitigation outlined being secured and the appellant had provided a completed section 106 agreement. 

In light of no adverse effect on a Ramsar site, the inspector held that the tilted balance applied to her decision. She weighed the substantial benefits of 130 market houses and 70 affordable houses located close to a railway station against loss of rural character, loss of best and most versatile agricultural land and conflict with development plan housing strategy. Overall, the inspector concluded the presumption in favour of sustainable development applied, despite acknowledging the considerable local opposition to the development.

Inspector: Hayley Butcher; Inquiry
DCS Number: 200-010-913

An inspector has rejected design concerns over a proposed 130-home scheme on the outskirts of an Essex village.

The site comprised mainly greenfield land behind frontage plotland bungalows located outside the settlement boundary of the large village. Under local plan policy, development was restricted on the site, but the council accepted that the policy was out of date. It also acknowledged that, in principle, housing on the site reflected the plan’s spatial strategy and would deliver a boost to housing supply. Nonetheless, it objected to the appeal scheme’s design, criticising it as a bland, anodyne suburban-inspired design and density which did not respond to the village and rural context.

In the inspector’s assessment, however, a poor-quality street scene with its loose arrangement of dwellings, gypsy and traveller sites and business yards would in fact be enhanced by the removal of plotland bungalows. The replacement development would provide a curved three-storey terrace, creating a landmark village gateway and framing a countryside vista along an access road through the site where rural views were currently limited, the inspector found. In his view, the scheme would suitably round off the village.

The inspector concluded that the proposal comprised an addition to the suburban extent of a mainly 20th century village lacking in any distinctive character of its own. The design approach was therefore contextually appropriate, he held. Overall, he was satisfied the proposal would provide a well-designed housing development, which would enhance the area. 

Inspector: Jonathan Price; Inquiry
DCS Number: 200-010-897

A housing land shortfall has been held to justify a 78-home scheme on green belt land outside a Strathclyde village.

Scottish ministers approved the scheme despite accepting the proposal was in conflict with the area’s spatial strategy. The ministers agreed with the reporter that as most of the site comprised fields and an area of public open space lay within the green belt, its development for housing would be contrary to the adopted local plan. They agreed it should only be permitted if justified by a regional plan policy requiring councils to remedy any shortfalls in housing land.

The reporter identified a likely housing land shortfall of sufficient scale for this policy to apply. When assessed against its criteria, he found that the site would deliver housing within the next five years and contribute to sustainable development as it would help remedy a housing shortage (citing Gladman Developments Ltd v Scottish Ministers 2020). The development would also be in keeping with the character of the settlement and the local area, and would not undermine green belt objectives, he held.

Ministers agreed that, despite the site being in a location where housing development would not normally be supported and occupiers would be reliant on cars to commute, the proposal, overall, accorded with the development plan. They agreed that the fact that it would contribute to sustainable development secured further support from the presumption in favour set out in national policy. They concluded that adverse impacts would not outweigh the benefits in the tilted balance.

Reporter: David Bullya; Written representations
DCS Number: 200-010-898

A proposed bungalow on garden land in a Hampshire village was dismissed, after an inspector held that impacts on protected nature conservation sites would not be made acceptable.

The inspector dismissed two alternative schemes for the bungalow, after he refused to sanction the use of a Grampian condition to mitigate impacts on internationally protected nature conservation sites. The appeal site was located close to a number of internationally protected nature conservation sites sensitive to nutrients in waste water and recreational pressure, where mitigation was required to address the likely significant effects of new housing. The council had put in place a mitigation strategy in relation to recreational pressure but was still in the process of working on strategic solutions for achieving nutrient neutrality in line with recent Natural England advice.

The appellants had submitted a signed unilateral undertaking seeking to secure payment of contributions towards mitigation of recreational pressure but as it was undated, the inspector gave it no weight. He also rejected the council’s suggested use of Grampian conditions as an alternative, judging the approach to be contrary to advice on the use of such conditions in national guidance. He also disagreed that the council’s lack of a five-year housing land supply provided exceptional circumstances justifying use of the proposed condition and a departure from the guidance.

On the other main issues, the inspector found no harm to area character and appearance or residential amenity. However, in light of his finding that the nutrient and recreational effects of the developments on European sites would not be made acceptable, contrary to the Habitats Regulations and the development plan, he decided the appeals should fail.

Inspector: Benjamin Webb; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-475

A proposed replacement rectory has been dismissed after an inspector was unable to conclude that the integrity of a special area of conservation (SAC) would be preserved.

 The appellant, a church council, proposed a new rectory and additional staff dwelling, along with new parish offices, a café and a day nursery, as a replacement for their existing facilities in a village conservation area in Buckinghamshire. Assessing the impacts of the scheme, the inspector held that the proposal would preserve and enhance the wooded appearance of the site without harming the rural tranquillity and character of the wider conservation area.

But in the course of the appeal, government agency Natural England issued updated advice regarding proposals within the Chiltern Beechwoods SAC’s 12.6-kilometre  zone of influence, in which the site was located. The new advice stated that net increases in residential development within this zone would result in likely significant effects on the SAC from added recreational pressure. 

The inspector rejected the appellant’s arguments that the site was towards the outer limits of the zone and that other recreational opportunities were available. He concluded that an appropriate assessment under the Habitats Regulations was required, and that there was insufficient evidence for him to conclude that the integrity of the SAC would be preserved. 

Given the international importance of the SAC, he concluded the potential for harm to the designation carried overriding weight and he dismissed the appeal.

Inspector: Liam Page; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-412

A proposal for a replacement house in the Sussex countryside has been held to reach the bar of outstanding design.

The appellant sought to demolish a modest house and large utilitarian agricultural buildings prominently located on the brow of a hill, and construct a replacement house and detached garage building. The new house, a modern design comprising three limbs and a central hub in a mixture of one and two storeys, was proposed instead to be set down into the valley beyond, with defined garden areas set into the natural amphitheatre created by the surrounding valley. The rest of the site would be retained as open land or woodland.

The appeal site lay within an area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB) but, due to its visual isolation, the inspector considered the effect of the proposal would be localised and retain the essential mixed agricultural and residential character of the site. Subject to a condition ensuring only the formal garden areas could become domesticated with paraphernalia, the inspector held that the proposal would protect the rural landscape character and scenic beauty of the AONB. In his view, due to the site’s proposed location in the valley, the level of excavation would be limited and existing soils would largely be protected.

The inspector noted that the proposal would protect rather than enhance the AONB, which weighed neutrally in the planning balance. However, he ruled that the proposed design, with its unashamedly modern character and clever positioning in the valley and using the land’s natural topography, was an outstanding and innovative design that attracted significant positive weight in accordance with paragraph 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Enhancement of ancient woodland and biodiversity were additional positive factors in the inspector’s decision to allow the appeal.

Inspector: Owen Woodwards; Hearing
DCS Number: 200-010-916

Housing conversion

The proposed conversion of a pub to flats in Bristol has been allowed after an inspector held that it was not required to serve local community needs.

The council originally granted permission for the proposal to convert the pub to five flats in a residential area of the city. However, its decision had been quashed following a successful legal challenge, on the grounds that matters of equality, asset of community value and local plan policy had not been properly considered. 

Assessing the resubmitted application, the inspector noted that local plan policy made clear that the loss of established public houses would not be permitted unless a diverse range of public house provision existed within the locality. The council considered that the 14 pubs identified by the appellant were not appropriate alternatives, referring to perceived social barriers for vulnerable members of the community and walking routes being unsafe for women and LGBTQ+ groups. Applying Manual for Streets guidance on walkable neighbourhoods and safe traffic-free routes for pedestrians, the inspector discounted a number of these pubs, but found that this still left ten pubs which were accessible along safe routes within a reasonable walking distance. Several of these offered quiz nights, sports, live music events, food and were family friendly, the inspector noted.

Given this finding of adequate alternative provision, the inspector held local plan policy was satisfied and there was no need to consider whether the pub was still viable. Acknowledging that allowing the appeal could interfere with the rights of those who felt they would no longer have safe access to a diverse range of public houses in the locality, the inspector stated it was a legitimate and well-established planning policy aim to provide new homes through the conversion of public houses and allowing the appeal would be proportionate and necessary and would not unacceptably violate rights.

Inspector: M Howell; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-692

 

A building in a north London town has been ruled to be not a block of flats and therefore not compliant with permitted development rules for additional upper storeys.

The appellants had proposed an additional storey containing four flats, under GPDO Part 20 Class A permitted development. But one of the stipulations for this form of permitted development is that the host building is a block of flats, and an inspector ruled that the lack of sole use of a basement car park by residents took the building outside this definition. 

The inspector recorded that for the proposed additional storey containing four flats to be classed as permitted development under class A, it must be a) a block of flats; b) detached and c) purpose-built. The council and appellants disputed whether the appeal property was a detached building and a block of flats, given a basement car park underneath which was shared with occupiers of nearby commercial premises.

On the matter of detachment, the inspector accepted that the basement car park was a building in accordance with planning law. The car park shared external walls with the flats above and fell within a single freehold ownership. The inspector, however, referred to definitions in the Party Wall Act 1996 to conclude that, as a consequence of the long-leasehold owner/occupiers of the flats not owning the external walls, even though the flats above shared a floor partition/ceiling structure with the car park below, they did not share a party wall with it. Accordingly, he held that the appeal property was a detached building.

On the question of whether the appeal property was a block of flats, the inspector had regard to the GPDO definition as a building which is divided horizontally and consists of separate and self-contained premises constructed for the purposes of a dwellinghouse, and any ancillary facilities constructed solely for use by occupiers of the building. As the evidence indicated the basement car park served not only the residents of the flats above but also occupiers of the nearby commercial units, the inspector held this ancillary facility was not solely for use by the residential occupiers of the building. As a consequence the proposal did not fully satisfy the requirements of class A and was not permitted development, he ruled.

Inspector: Clive Coyne; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-444

Mixed development 

Conflict with the National Design Guide has scuppered plans to redevelop a derelict site in Greater Manchester.

The appellant proposed a mixed-use scheme at a former B&Q store next to Lancashire County Cricket Club’s Old Trafford ground, which included 332 homes, and commercial development. It was located within a strategic location within which high-quality residential uses were supported centred around an improved cricket stadium.

The inspector agreed that the appeal site, being relatively unconstrained, could be developed in any number of ways. However, as proposed, he held that the development would be viewed as two large blocks of development and while each block would have a varied and stepped increase in scale, height and massing, it would lead to a design which would be perceived to have a negative impact on the area’s character and appearance. It would give rise to a high-density scheme in stark contrast to lower density housing in the immediate area, the inspector noted. This would give rise to a jarring built form which would not be sympathetic to the local area, he held.

The inspector also noted that residents of the proposed development could be affected by noise impacts from concerts at the cricket ground, and that the proposal would not mitigate this impact. The proposal was therefore in conflict with paragraphs 185 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, he held. 

Overall, the inspector accepted that the council’s significant shortfall in deliverable housing sites weighed in favour of granting permission. Affordable housing added to the significant weight in its favour. However, he held that this was outweighed by the harm the proposal’s design would cause. The proposal would not deliver a high-quality, well-designed building and place, the inspector concluded.

Inspector: Andrew McGlone; Inquiry
DCS Number: 200-010-862

The public benefits of a proposed mixed-use scheme in Newcastle city centre have been held to outweigh design concerns.

An inspector approved the proposal for 289 Built to Rent apartments, together with commercial space, on the long-vacant gap site on the north bank of the River Tyne, judging it would provide an acceptable redevelopment of the land. The proposal involved a 14-storey building with wings fronting the quayside to create a private podium deck at first-floor level. 

Assessing the impact on the character and appearance of the area, the inspector agreed that the footprint was an appropriate response to the local context. Although the building would be of significant scale and would break the skyline, she held it would not be significantly taller than the majority of surrounding buildings. However, the inspector accepted that the proposal’s architectural design represented limited conflict with policy. The building would have a “somewhat regimented and serious appearance” from the design, she held. Overall, it would have a strong vertical emphasis with a flat roof, which had been redesigned from an original mono-pitched design, the inspector noted. In her view, this change meant the proposal had “lost a fun element”, and that the redesigned roof “would not address the sky”. 

In the overall planning balance, the inspector concluded that, although the proposal would give rise to a limited impact on the area’s character as well as limited harm to the setting of a listed church, it did have positive design attributes and significant public benefits. She found that, crucially, the development was in public ownership and was fully funded and deliverable in the context of a site which had not been realised for more than 30 years.

Inspector: Claire Searson; Inquiry
DCS Number: 200-010-866

A proposal to convert a vacant industrial building in Dorset to a mixed-use scheme has been held to conflict with employment policy and heritage protection.

The appellants sought to convert the vacant buildings in a town conservation area to a mix of light industry and offices, with nine serviced apartments above in a new second floor. The premises lay within an industrial estate identified as a key employment site for industrial and other similar uses in the development plan, and council evidence suggested recent demand for such premises. The inspector held that while the appeal scheme could generate more jobs than the previous builders' merchant occupier, this alone did not comprise the economic enhancement required by policy to justify other uses on key employment sites.

The Victorian/Edwardian warehouse comprised a non-designated heritage asset making an important contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area, in the inspector’s opinion. In her view, the addition of a second floor in the form of a large extension between the existing roof pitches of the warehouse would be alien and overwhelmingly dominating. She held that its domestic appearance, including extensive glazing and balconies, would detract from the industrial character of the building and fail to preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area. 

The inspector also expressed concern over the lack of information regarding the loss of historic fabric and features, and that their loss would add to the erosion of the building’s special interest. Overall, the inspector held there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposal, which involved significant interventions to convert the buildings to serviced accommodation, would constitute optimum viable use. In accordance with paragraph 202 of the National Planning Policy Framework, she concluded there were no public benefits to outweigh the harm. 

Inspector: Sophie Edwards; Written representations
DCS Number: 400-035-729

Transport development

The need for motorway junction improvements has been held to justify granting development consent for two highways projects on the M25 motorway.

The secretary of state for transport approved two National Highways applications – one for improvements at the Wisley interchange in Surrey and the second at junction 28 in the Essex green belt. The Surrey proposal comprised the alteration and upgrading of the existing roundabout at junction 10 with the A3, while the Essex scheme involved a loop road involving four new bridges and an underpass. Both schemes had the objective of alleviating congestion, reducing accident rates and accommodating predicted housing and economic growth.

The secretary of state considered that, for both schemes, the need for the development had been established in light of the National Planning Policy Statement for National Networks (NPSNN) which identified a critical need to improve national networks. On the Essex scheme, he further held that this need and the absence of alternatives avoiding the green belt outweighed substantial harm from inappropriate development and loss of openness. He noted that the local planning authority had accepted in a statement of common ground that very special circumstances justified the development.

On the issue of climate change, the secretary of state held that, in relation to both schemes, over time the net carbon emissions from operation of the improved junctions would decrease as measures to reduce emissions from vehicles were delivered. The schemes would have no material impact on the government’s ability to meet its net zero carbon targets, he held.

On the Surrey scheme, the secretary of state agreed with the examining authority that the benefits of the junction improvements clearly outweighed its harms, the most significant of which was the direct loss of an area of special protection area habitat. On the Essex scheme, the secretary of state similarly agreed with the examining authority that the adverse effects of the proposal did not outweigh the benefits of the junction improvements.

Examiners (the Surrey scheme): Gavin Jones, Grahame Gould; Hearing 
Examiners (the Essex scheme): Richard Allen, Rod MacArthur; Hearing
DCS Numbers: 200-010-882 and 200-010-899

Very special circumstances have been held to justify a new motorway services area (MSA) in Cheshire. 

The MSA was proposed for a site at junction 11 of the M62, on agricultural land in the green belt. The appellants proposed a main building, with a hotel of up to 100 bedrooms, a service yard, a fuel filling station, electric charging station, parking facilities, landscaping and amenity areas.

In assessing the need for the development, the inspector heard that the proposed MSA would plug four gaps exceeding the recommended 28 miles maximum distance between MSAs set out in government Circular 02/2013 on the provision of roadside services on the strategic road network. Government agency National Highways had confirmed that there was a need for the proposal, and that highway safety benefits arising from the proposal should be afforded very significant weight. The inspector had regard to case law requiring the views of statutory consultees to be given great or considerable weight and to the extent of the excess distance between the gaps between the MSAs which would be plugged by the proposal. In doing so, he found a clear and demonstrable need for an MSA on this part of the motorway network.

In the absence of sequentially preferable green belt or non-green belt sites, the inspector gave the identified need considerable weight and judged that this amounted to very special circumstances justifying the development. The scheme’s benefits outweighed harm to the green belt, and other harm arising from loss of openness, loss of best and most versatile agricultural land and moderate to minor adverse landscape impacts, he ruled. 

Inspector: George Baird; Inquiry
DCS Number: 200-010-853