The proposed development is described on the planning appeal form as “Outline application with some matters reserved (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for 28no. dwellings, associated means of access and demolition of 61 Harlsey Road and 61A Harlsey Road has been dismissed.

The main issues were whether the site would be suitable location for residential development with regard to planning policy in respect of development in the countryside, character and appearance, highway safety and capacity and whether sufficient information has been provided in respect of flood risk. 

The proposed development is residential development consisting of 5 pairs of semi-detached houses with new access has been dismissed has effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, including its effect on trees; whether the proposal would provide suitable living conditions for future occupants, with particular regard to the presence of trees on the site and the effect of the proposed development on drainage. 

The proposed development of the provision of 38 dwellings including 15 affordable has been dismissed. The main issues are whether or not the proposal would be in a suitable location for the dwellings concerned, having regard to the Council’s development plan spatial strategy policies, including whether or not the scheme would represent rounding off, appropriate development of previously developed land, infill development, or a rural exception site or the effect of the proposed development on the Fal and Helford special area of conservation. 

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of 27No. dwellings with associated access, roads, footways, parking, drainage and landscaping at Land Adjacent Foxes Run, Bridgwater Buildings, Castle CaryBA7 7JU in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 16/03447/FUL,dated 5 August 2016, subject to the conditions in the attached Annex

The proposed development of the erection of 95 dwellings access, landscaping and associated infrastructure has been dismissed. 

The main issue being the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, with particular regard to whether it would lead to the harmful coalescence of Bierton & Aylesbury. Whether the scheme would make adequate provision for public open space, the effect of the proposal on the operation of the local highway network, whether the development would take appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes and in light of their findings on the above matters, and policy set out within the national planning policy framework, whether the proposal would represent a sustainable form of development. 

The proposed development of the erection of 95 dwellings access, landscaping and associated infrastructure has been dismissed. 

The main issue being the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, with particular regard to whether it would lead to the harmful coalescence of Bierton & Aylesbury. Whether the scheme would make adequate provision for public open space, the effect of the proposal on the operation of the local highway network, whether the development would take appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes and in light of their findings on the above matters, and policy set out within the national planning policy framework, whether the proposal would represent a sustainable form of development. 

The proposed development of a redevelopment of existing commercial building to provide 30 dwellings, replacement D2 facility ( as extension to the existing clubhouse); and associated landscaping and carpark has been dismissed.

The main issues in this case are:

•Whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt, having regard to the Framework, relevant development plan policies and the effect of the proposal on the openness of the Green Belt; and

• Whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal

The proposed development of the erection of 10 dwellings, demolition of existing dwelling & associated works has been dismissed.

The main issues are:

•the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the appeal site and its surroundings, including Sutton in Craven conservation area and nearby listed buildings;

•whether the proposed development would increase the risk of flooding within the site or elsewhere.

The proposed development of existing buildings and erection of 12 no apartments has been dismissed.

I consider the main issue to be whether the proposal would providean acceptable standard of development, with particular regard to the absenceof parking and the amount and quality of external amenity space to beprovided and the effect of these factors on future occupants, the widerenvironment and the highway network

The proposed development of erection of 14 residential dwellings, 2 x 2 bedroom bungalows, 9x 4 bedroom detached & 3 x 2 bedroom terraced has been dismissed.

The Council refused the application for three reasons, one of which related to the effect of the proposal on archaeology. From the Council’s appeal statement it appears that they now consider that the archaeological information received is sufficient to allow any residual archaeological issues to be addressed through a planning condition.

Consequently, I consider the main issues now are the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area and whether the development would provide satisfactory living conditions for its future occupiers in respect of noise and disturbance.