Green belt home rejected

Planning inspector Brendan Lyons has rejected plans for a home to be built on eight acres of pasture field on the edge of Egerton which forms part of the Green Belt. The original proposal was refused as it was inappropriate development, which led to an appeal by the applicant.

The applicant wanted to build a detached home in the middle of the site. Around it, a detached stable, outdoor learning area for local schoolchildren and a wildlife area for lapwing nesting would be created. The proposed development would have been mainly built in stone, with the stable block being clad in metal.

The main issue for the inspector was trying to determine whether the damage to the Green Belt would be outweighed by the benefit of the proposed development, taking into consideration good design and potential social and environmental benefits. As the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) only allows Green Belt development in special circumstances, the development has to offer something unique to allow it to go ahead.

The local authority accepted that the proposed outdoor learning centre and wildlife area would have been acceptable. However, the main part of the proposal would "significantly alter the currently open and undeveloped character of the site". The effect on the openness of the Green Belt, in spatial and visual terms, was considered to be significant.

Given all of the details of the proposal and evidence of the case, the inspector decided that:

• there would be "significant harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriate development, and also to the openness of the Green Belt and the purposes of including land within it";
• the proposed design was well considered, but it was not outstanding or innovative;
• the outdoor learning area would have social and environmental benefits, but for a small part of the community, affecting the weight that could be given to the benefit in the inspector's decision.

Balancing all of the different elements of this case, the inspector decided that the potential harm to the Green Belt should be given substantial weight. That harm would therefore not be outweighed by the potential benefits of the proposal, therefore conflicting with local and national policy.

The appeal was therefore dismissed.