The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 12 March 2025 by J Hobbs MRTPI MCD BSc (hons) an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 15 April 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 The Limes, Holme Street, Tarvin, Chester, Cheshire West and Chester CH3 8EQ • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr P Minchin of Carden Homes Ltd against the decision of Cheshire West and Chester Council. • The application Ref is 23/01306/FUL. • The development proposed was originally described as “Full Planning application seeking the demolition of the existing buildings on site and the erection of 8 detached dwellings, with garages at The Limes, Holme Street.” Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. A revised National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published on 12 December 2024. I sought submissions from the parties on this matter. I have considered the additional submissions alongside the original representations. 3. The appellant originally sought planning permission for 8 dwellings, during the planning application process they amended the proposal and now seek permission for 7.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision The Council determined the application based on the proposal for 7 dwellings; consequently, I will do the same. 4. There is an extant planning permission1 for the conversion and extension of the barns to create 4 dwellings and the sub-division of the farmhouse into 2 dwellings with associated gardens and parking. The parties agree that this permission has been implemented but not completed. The difference between the proposals is the replacement of the farmhouse with a new dwelling, the provision of 2 new-build dwellings in place of proposed garages and a bat building, and the repositioning of a car port. Overall, the number of proposed dwellings would increase from 6 to 7. 5. As part of their appeal submission the appellant has indicated that they no longer seek to demolish the farmhouse. Instead, they intend to sub-divide it to create two dwellings, as per the extant permission, but still seek permission for the other aspects of the appeal proposal (‘the Alternative Proposal’). The appellant has not submitted new plans.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision In effect, they have requested a split decision in the event I consider harm arises from the demolition of the farmhouse, whereby I grant permission for the 2 new-build dwellings but dismiss the replacement dwelling. My 1 Planning permission Ref. 20/00062/FUL, granted 27 November 2020 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision In effect, they have requested a split decision in the event I consider harm arises from the demolition of the farmhouse, whereby I grant permission for the 2 new-build dwellings but dismiss the replacement dwelling. My 1 Planning permission Ref. 20/00062/FUL, granted 27 November 2020 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 assessment is of the proposal that was before the Council during the planning application, I will then consider the prospect of a split decision. Background and Main Issues 6. Whether the proposal makes an appropriate contribution toward affordable housing provision did not form one of the reasons for refusal on the Decision Notice. Nevertheless, the Council did indicate that an affordable housing contribution could be secured by condition or legal agreement within its Delegated Report. Moreover, within its Appeal Statement the Council has indicated that as neither a Viability Appraisal nor information on how affordable housing would be secured has been provided, then a legal agreement would be necessary to secure affordable housing. In turn, as no legal agreement has been provided, the Council contends that the proposal would be contrary to Policy SOC1 of the Cheshire West & Chester Council, Local Plan (Part One) Strategic Policies (LPP1). 7.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Taking this into account and the reasons for refusal, the main issues are: • the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, including the effect on a non-designated heritage asset and trees; • whether the appeal site is an appropriate location for new residential development, with particular reference to the spatial strategy and accessibility of amenities and facilities; • whether the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt; • the effect of the proposal on the openness and purposes of the Green Belt; • whether the proposal would provide appropriate living conditions for future occupiers, with particular regard to the provision of external amenity space; • the effect of the proposal on protected species; • whether the proposal makes an appropriate contribution toward affordable housing provision; • the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of occupiers of The Limes Cottage, with particular regard to privacy; and • whether any harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, would be clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify the proposal. Reasons Character and appearance 8.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision The appeal site is a farmyard comprising of many agricultural buildings and a farmhouse. Most of these buildings are of a form which is reflective of the historic agricultural use of the appeal site. There is also a wooded area toward the site’s frontage which contributes to its sylvan nature. The site is largely surrounded by open fields, with a dwelling toward the rear. Given the historic use of the site and the surrounding land uses, the area is rural in character. 9. The farmhouse has been identified as a non-designated heritage asset. Many of the building’s historical features, which are locally distinctive, have been retained. Not only is it a good example of a late 18th/early 19th century Cheshire agricultural building, but it is also in a prominent position toward the front of the site and close to Holme Street (A51), which is an arterial route through this part of Cheshire. As such, the significance of the non-designated heritage asset in part relates to its historical features and its prominence in the street scene. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 10. The proposal includes two new-build dwellings within plots 6 and 7. These dwellings would include external finishes and design features which would be reminiscent of the agricultural buildings. This includes the use of Cheshire brick, timber framed porches and garages, and slate roofs, as well as the inclusion of arched window frames. Nonetheless, the proposed dwellings would include extensive glazing and would have a much lower solid to void ratio than the proposed converted buildings. The position of openings on these properties would also be at regular intervals and would appear at odds with the irregularly positioned openings on the agricultural buildings. The two new-build dwellings would be domestic in appearance, would appear incongruous when viewed alongside the proposed converted buildings, and would not assimilate with the rural character of the area. 11. The proposal would also lead to the total loss of a non-designated heritage asset. Paragraph 216 of the Framework requires a balanced judgement on the effect of a proposal on a non-designated heritage asset, having regard to the loss and the significance of the asset.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision The appellant contended that the demolition was required to ensure the viability of the proposal, and that the replacement dwelling would provide suitable living arrangements for modern living. Subsequently, the appellant has agreed that the farmhouse could be retained whilst ensuring the proposal’s viability. Moreover, no substantive evidence has been provided to indicate that a conversion of the farmhouse would not provide suitable living arrangements. As such, the loss of the non-designated heritage asset has not been justified. 12. In addition, the proposed replacement dwelling would be in proximity to several of the trees toward the site’s frontage. No substantive evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the proposal would not have a harmful effect on these trees. Whilst none of the trees are subject to a Tree Preservation Order, the felling or significant work to them would be harmful to the site’s sylvan character. Albeit tree protection measures could be secured by a condition attached to any permission. 13. The appeal site is partially screened from public view by a tall brick wall and mature vegetation. This could be complimented by additional soft landscaping.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Moreover, the new-build dwellings would be sited toward the rear of the site away from the road. However, the screening of harmful development does not make it acceptable, at most it would reduce the extent of the harm. 14. I conclude that the proposal would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area, including a non-designated heritage asset and would potentially have a harmful effect on trees which positively contribute to the area. The proposal would be contrary to LPP1 policies ENV3, ENV5 and ENV6, policies DM3, DM19, DM21, DM45, and DM48 of the Cheshire West & Chester Council, Local Plan (Part Two) Land Allocations and Detailed Policies (LPP2) and Policy HG3 of the Tarvin Neighbourhood Development Plan 2018-2030 (TNDP). These policies indicate that development should safeguard non-designated heritage assets, development will be supported where it conserves trees, and all residential development should be designed to respect the built environment. The proposal would also be contrary to paragraph 135 of the Framework where it indicates that planning decisions should ensure that developments are sympathetic to local character, amongst other matters. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 Location 15. LPP1 Policy STRAT2 outlines a settlement hierarchy. To maintain the vitality and viability of rural areas, the Policy supports an appropriate level of new development, focussed on key service centres including Tarvin. Notwithstanding this, the appeal site is located close to but not within Tarvin. Instead, for the purposes of local planning policy, it is in the countryside. 16. LPP1 Policy STRAT9 supports certain forms of development in the countryside including replacement buildings where it does not harm the character and appearance of the area. Nonetheless, LPP2 Policy DM19 supports the replacement of an existing dwelling in the countryside if it is in accordance with LPP2 Policy DM21. This Policy supports proposals for replacement dwellings subject to a specified criteria including where the existing dwelling does not have a recognised special historic value. The farmhouse has been identified as a non-designated heritage asset. Therefore, its demolition would be contrary to LPP2 Policy DM21 and LPP2 Policy DM19 due to their interdependence.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Furthermore, the construction of 2 new-build dwellings in the countryside would not be supported by other exceptions specified in either LPP1 Policy STRAT9 or LPP2 Policy DM19. 17. LPP1 Policy STRAT1 sets out the sustainable development principles for the whole plan. These include encouraging the use and redevelopment of previously developed land and buildings in sustainable locations and locating new housing with good accessibility to local amenities and facilities. 18. There is a good provision of amenities and facilities within Tarvin which could support future occupiers’ everyday needs. However, the appeal site is approximately 1 mile from Tarvin. Although there is a continuous footpath between the appeal site and Tarvin, it is narrow and alongside a national speed limit road which is an arterial route. Given the characteristics of the road and footpath, walking or cycling from the appeal site to Tarvin would be unpleasant, especially in inclement weather and during winter evenings. As such, future occupiers would be discouraged from walking or cycling regularly to Tarvin to access amenities and facilities which service their everyday needs. 19.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision The nearest bus stop is located on the A51 and is not in proximity to the appeal site. Future occupiers would have to walk a moderate distance along the road to access it. This bus stop offers limited services to several locations including Chester and Northwich. Due to the distance to the bus stop and the limited services, it is unlikely future occupiers would regularly use the bus. Future occupiers would be reliant on the use of private motor vehicles to access amenities and facilities to service their everyday needs. 20. Paragraph 110 of the Framework is clear that opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary between urban and rural areas. The provision of sustainable transport solutions is limited in this rural area, but Chester is only a short drive away from the appeal site. Notwithstanding this, the proposal would be contrary to paragraph 115 of the Framework where it indicates that it should be ensured that sustainable transport modes are prioritised. 21. I note that the Council granted planning permission for residential development at the appeal site in November 2020.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision I also acknowledge that the development plan was not updated in the intervening period between the granting of that permission https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision I also acknowledge that the development plan was not updated in the intervening period between the granting of that permission https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 and the determination of the application subject to this appeal. Nonetheless, the granting of permission for residential development at the appeal site does not alter my conclusion on whether the location has good accessibility to local amenities and facilities. Therefore, the extant permission does not set a precedent for the appeal proposal in this regard. 22. I conclude that the appeal site is not an appropriate location for residential development, with particular reference to the spatial strategy and accessibility of amenities and facilities. The proposal would be contrary to LPP1 policies STRAT1, STRAT2, and STRAT 9, and LPP2 Policy DM19 for the reasons given above. Green Belt 23. It is not disputed that there is an extant planning permission for residential development at the appeal site and that this permission has been implemented but has not been completed. My observations during the site visit confirmed this position. There is no evidence that the vacant buildings have been used for residential purposes. They were last used for agricultural purposes, as per the definition in the Framework, they are not previously developed land.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision For the avoidance of doubt, the farmhouse and its curtilage comprise previously developed land. 24. Paragraph 142 of the Framework indicates that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open and the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and permanence. 25. Paragraph 154 of the Framework explains that development in the Green Belt is inappropriate unless one of the specified exceptions applies. Criterion d) identifies that the replacement of a building provided that the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces is not inappropriate. The proposed replacement dwelling would be smaller than the farmhouse. As such, in accordance with the Framework, this aspect of the proposal would not be inappropriate development in the Green Belt. 26. Criterion g) identifies that the limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed land which would not cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt would not be inappropriate. As above, the 2 new-build dwellings would be sited in an area which is not previously developed land.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Therefore, this aspect of the proposal would not comply with this exception. 27. Nonetheless, I am mindful of the fallback position provided by the extant permission. In effect, the appellant is seeking the replacement of residential outbuildings with two new-build dwellings. The dwellings would be taller and larger than the outbuildings, particularly the proposed dwelling in Plot 6. Moreover, they would be brick built and have a more permanent appearance than the timber clad outbuildings. Proportionately, the two new-build dwellings would also significantly increase the amount of residential activity and domestic paraphernalia within the appeal site. As such, even if the extant permission had been fully implemented, the proposal would cause substantial harm to the openness of the Green Belt and would not comply with exception 154 g). In addition, the proposed dwellings would be materially larger than the outbuildings. As such, it would not comply with exception 154 d). https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 28. Paragraph 155 of the Framework explains that the development of homes in the Green Belt should not be regarded as inappropriate where all the specified criteria apply. Criterion c) specifies that the development would be in a sustainable location, with particular reference to paragraphs 110 and 115 of the Framework. As above, the proposal would not be in a sustainable location and would be contrary to the guidance within paragraph 115 of the Framework. As such, the proposal would not comply with paragraph 155 of the Framework. 29. The openness of the Green Belt has both spatial and visual aspects. In combination the footprint and volume of the new-build dwellings would be smaller than the agricultural buildings they would replace. Nonetheless, one of the agricultural buildings that would be demolished is a large pole barn which is fully open on one side and open at slab level on two further sides. The open appearance of the pole barn is noticeably different to the proposed new-build dwellings. Also, the new-build dwellings would increase the amount of residential activity and domestic paraphernalia within the appeal site.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Moreover, agricultural buildings would be expected in this rural location, the introduction of further residential development including formal grounds would harm the openness of the Green Belt. The proposal would also represent a further encroachment into the countryside and consequently would be contrary to the purposes set out within paragraph 143 of the Framework. 30. Overall, the proposal would represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt and would have a harmful effect on its openness and purposes. The proposal would be contrary to LPP1 Policy STRAT9 and LPP2 Policy DM19. These policies indicate that proposals for the development of land in the Green Belt must accord with the Framework, amongst other matters. Living conditions – future occupiers 31. The proposed dwelling within Plot 7 would be a family-sized dwelling. Given the rural location and the unconstrained nature of the appeal site, the property would be expected to be accompanied by a moderate sized garden. The proposed external space within Plot 7 is of a comparable size to the footprint of the dwelling and outbuilding combined.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Due to the orientation of the plot and the proposed siting of the buildings, there would not be one large area of external amenity space. Instead, there would be small areas around the buildings. Some outside activities, such as the drying of clothes would be possible, but the external space would be very limited given the size of the proposed dwelling and the amount of people that could occupy it. 32. The appellant contends that the proposed dwelling would be next to a 2-acre paddock. The Council has indicated that permission would be required to change the use of that land. Even if, that land could be lawfully used as a paddock, it would not be a direct replacement for an appropriately sized garden. In addition, there is no mechanism before me to ensure that it could be enjoyed by future occupiers of Plot 7 in perpetuity. As such, the presence of nearby paddock land would not adequately mitigate the limited amount of external amenity space. 33. I conclude that the proposal would not provide appropriate living conditions for future occupiers, with particular regard to the provision of external amenity space. The proposal would be contrary to LPP1 Policy SOC5 and LPP2 Policy DM2.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision These policies indicate that development that gives rise to significant adverse https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision These policies indicate that development that gives rise to significant adverse https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 impacts on quality of life, including residential amenity, will not be allowed, amongst other matters. Protected species 34. Circular 06/20052 identifies that it is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species, and the extent that they may be affected by the proposed development, is established, before planning permission is granted. Further to this, it caveats that developers should not be expected to undertake surveys unless there is a reasonable likelihood of the species being present and affected by the decision. 35. Both the Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment3 and Ascerta’s response letter4 conclude that following the initial inspection, nocturnal surveys of some of the buildings, are required to confirm if bat roosts are present. These surveys have not been completed. There is a reasonable likelihood that bat roosts would be affected by the demolition of the farmhouse and conversion of some of the buildings. The surveys are therefore necessary to establish their presence and the extent to which they may be affected. Without the survey results I cannot conclude that the proposal would not have a harmful effect on roosting bats. 36.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision In addition, the proposal seeks to amend the previous permission by replacing a building which included a bat loft, which was proposed to mitigate the effect of that proposal. No new features have been proposed to replace that aspect of the original proposal. Albeit mitigation measures could be secured via a condition attached to any permission. 37. Some of the trees close to the farmhouse have been identified as providing low bat roost potential. Although the appellant has indicated that these would be retained as part of the proposal, they would be located close to the replacement dwelling. Nonetheless, as above appropriate tree protection measures could be secured via a condition attached to any permission. 38. Overall, I conclude that it has not been demonstrated that the proposal would not have a harmful effect on protected species. The proposal would be contrary to LPP1 Policy ENV4 and LPP2 Policy DM44 which indicate that sites will be protected from loss or damage taking account of the impact on protected species, amongst other matters. Affordable housing 39.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision LPP1 Policy SOC1 indicates that affordable housing will be sought within new residential development in rural areas which have capacity of three or more dwellings or comprise of an area of 0.1 hectares or more. Further to this, the Policy indicates provision will be sought on site, up to a target of 30%, depending on the circumstances including the viability of a scheme. 40. The appeal proposal is an amended version of a previously consented scheme. The appellant contends it is necessary to amend the scheme to ensure its viability. No substantive evidence has been provided to demonstrate whether the original proposal is viable or not, or whether the appeal proposal could accommodate 2 Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – statutory obligations and their impact within the planning system, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, August 2005 3 Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment, Ref. P.1947.24, dated February 2024, Ascerta 4 Ecology and Tree response in relation to reason for refusal 7 and 8, dated 18th September 2024 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 7

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 affordable housing and be viable. Consequently, I conclude that the proposal would not make an appropriate contribution toward affordable housing provision and would be contrary to LPP1 Policy SOC1, for the reasons given above. Living conditions – neighbouring occupiers 41. Given the location of their property to the rear of a vacant farmyard, away from the road, and largely surrounded by open fields, the occupiers of The Lime Cottage currently benefit from a high level of privacy. The proposed dwelling within Plot 7 would include second floor windows within the rear elevation which would provide indirect views of The Lime Cottage’s garden. The occupation of the proposed dwelling within Plot 7 would undoubtably reduce the level of privacy currently enjoyed by the occupiers of The Lime Cottage. Nevertheless, the garden area would not be directly overlooked and there would be a good amount of separation between the dwellings. Whilst reduced, the level of privacy enjoyed by occupiers of The Lime Cottage would still be acceptable. 42.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision I conclude that the proposal would not have a harmful effect on the living conditions of occupiers of The Limes Cottage, with particular regard to privacy. In this regard only, it would comply with LPP1 Policy SOC5 and LPP2 Policy DM2, where they indicate that new development will be expected to safeguard the quality of life for those living nearby, amongst other matters. Other considerations 43. Paragraph 153 of the Framework is clear that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. It goes on to explain that very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm resulting from the proposal is clearly outweighed by other considerations. 44. Part of the proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision In addition, harm would arise from the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, including its effect on a non-designated heritage asset and trees, the living conditions of future occupiers, and protected species, as well as the proposed location of residential development, and a lack of affordable housing provision. Overall, I ascribe substantial weight to the harm that would arise from the proposal. 45. In accordance with paragraphs 61, 73 and 125 of the Framework, the proposal would support the Government’s objective of significantly boosting the supply of homes, be an example of a small site which could make an important contribution toward the housing requirement of the area and promote the development of under-utilised land and buildings. It would introduce an active use to the site, which would reduce the opportunity for crime and anti-social behaviour. There would also be economic benefits through an investment in local materials, increased tax receipts, and related to the construction period. 46. The appellant has indicated that the appeal proposal is necessary to ensure the development of the site is viable.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision As no substantive evidence has been submitted in relation to this matter, I cannot corroborate the appellant’s contention. Therefore, the weight ascribe to this is tempered. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 8

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision As no substantive evidence has been submitted in relation to this matter, I cannot corroborate the appellant’s contention. Therefore, the weight ascribe to this is tempered. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 8

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/A0665/W/24/3352271 47. The provision of sufficient access and parking, a lack of an effect on designated heritage assets, and the redevelopment of a site that has a low flood risk are all neutral factors and do not weigh in favour or against the proposal. 48. In combination, due to the scale of the proposal, I ascribe moderate weight to other considerations in favour of the proposal. Consequently, these considerations would not outweigh the substantial harm and would not amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the proposal. Other Matters 49. The Alternative Proposal forwarded by the appellant would reduce the extent of the harm that would be generated by the appeal proposal, as it would not lead to the loss of a non-designated heritage asset or potential harm to trees along the site’s frontage. It could also lead to less harm to protected species. However, harm would persist due to the effect of that proposal on the Green Belt, character and appearance of the area, and the living conditions of future occupiers. In addition, there would still be harm related to the location of the proposed residential development and a lack of affordable housing provision.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision Overall, I would ascribe substantial weight to the harm that would arise from that proposal. 50. Consequently, the other considerations in favour of the proposal would not outweigh the harm that would be generated by the Alternative Proposal so as to amount to the very special circumstances required to justify that proposal. Planning Balance 51. There are no policies within the development plan that support a proposal which is inappropriate development in the Green Belt and not in accordance with the spatial strategy and would be contrary to the policies listed above. Therefore, the proposal would be contrary to the development plan as a whole. 52. The appellant has indicated that the Council has between 2 and 3 years’ supply of deliverable housing land. This has neither been confirmed or contested by the Council. Assuming the Council cannot demonstrate 5 years’ supply of deliverable housing land, footnote 8 of the Framework establishes that the policies which are most important for determining the application are out-of-date. 53.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — Appeal Decision In this instance paragraph 11 d) i) is engaged and advises granting permission unless the application of policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a strong reason for refusing the development. Footnote 7 of the Framework details that these policies include the Green Belt. As above, both the appeal proposal and the Alternative Proposal would cause harm to the Green Belt. Therefore, in both instances, the provision of paragraph 11 d) ii) of the Framework is not engaged. Conclusion 54. The proposal conflicts with the development plan, when considered as a whole, and the material considerations do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it. Therefore, the appeal should be dismissed.

The Limes Holme Street, Tarvin, CHESTER, CH3 8EQ — Cheshire West and Chester — J Hobbs INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 9