Appeal dismissed.

Application for costs:- No award made.

In his 9 page report, the Inspector accepts several of the points made by the appellants; however, he considered these to be outweighed by other factors.  We summarise some of his comments below.

Effect on openness and the purposes of including land in Green Belts

16 - “A local resident gave evidence, which was not challenged, that the gross floor area of the appeal scheme would exceed that of the former government buildings by about 58%.  That statistic, in isolation, is not determinative.  Nevertheless, I consider that it is one indication that the appeal scheme would have considerably greater bulk than the government buildings.”

17 - “I consider that the additional height and bulk of the appeal scheme would outweigh the benefit of the reduced footprint and spread of buildings on the site.  My overall assessment is that the appeal scheme, as compared with the government buildings, would result in significant harm to the openness of the Green Belt.”

19 - “In my view the nature of the appeal scheme would be quite different to that of the approved scheme.  The increased height and bulk of the buildings would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt.”

Effect on character and appearance and visual amenities of the Green Belt

30 - “I conclude that the proposal would not be harmful to the character and appearance of the area or to the visual amenities of the Green Belt.”

31 – “The appellant argued that the appeal proposal would represent an improvement, in townscape terms, as compared with the approved scheme.” …… “Whilst I have found the design of the appeal scheme to be satisfactory, in my view it has not been demonstrated that it would be an improvement on the approved scheme.”

Effect on living conditions of future occupiers

33 - “I find no conflict with LP Policy HSG16 insofar as that policy deals with overlooking and privacy.”

1

Other considerations

“I agree that the approved scheme represents a fallback position and that this is an important material consideration.  However, … , I consider that the appeal scheme would have agreater impact on the openness of the Green Belt.”

Whether very special circumstances exist

44 – “The proposal would amount to inappropriate development in the Green Belt which would, by definition be harmful, Mindful of the advice in PPG2, I attach substantial weight to this harm.  Moreover, it would result in significant harm to the openness of the Green Belt.  I consider that this is afurther substantial factor weighing against the appeal.”

46 – “The appeal scheme would make use of previously developed land and would contribute to the supply of housing, including affordable housing.  Whilst this is an important factor weighing in favour of the appeal, in my judgement it is not sufficient to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt that I have identified.  I conclude that the very special circumstances required to justify the development do not exist.”

47 – “I have concluded that the appeal proposal would have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt. It has not been shown that the appeal scheme would represent an improvement in terms of townscape.  In my view the only significant benefit of the appeal scheme is that it would make a greater contribution to the delivery of housing.  This is an important consideration.  Even so, I do not consider that the delivery of 11 additional units, of which 4 would be affordable, would be of sufficient benefit to outweigh the additional harm to the openness of the Green Belt that I have identified.” 

The Inspector’s report can be viewed in full on the Inspectorate web site, www.planning­inspectorate.gov.uk/pins/appeals and searching for appeal ref. APP/K3605/A/09/2095055.

From the above, there is re-assuring evidence that residents’ comments do not go unnoticed and our thanks must go to all who submitted comment on this, and related, planning applications and, in particular, to those who were able to attend and make presentations at the inquiry. It is also encouragement for those who might have been cynical about the worth of submitting comment on planning applications to be less hesitant in future.

Contact can be made with us by calling Don Beardshall (Chair) on 020-8398-6278