The DPEA has dismissed the appeal and refused planning permission in principle for the reconfiguration of the allotments and residential development, decision notice attached.

The Reporter considered the determining issues to be housing land supply; the principle of housing and the loss of open space; and whether any material considerations justified approval or refusal.

The Reporter considered the acceptability on the loss of open space. He noted the representations received and the use of the site as allotments indicated the site to be of value to the quality and character of the local area and that they appeared to be a well-used green space within an otherwise busy urban area. The Reporter found the proposal would have a significant impact upon the quality and character of the local environment.

The Reporter noted the demand for allotments in the city and found the reduction of the area used for allotments with no replacement facilities elsewhere indicated there was not a significant over provision of open space and that the loss of open space would be detrimental to the wider network. The Reporter concluded the proposal was contrary to policy Os 1 and therefore Hou 1 of the ECLP.

Although an application for planning permission in principle, the Reporter considered the Design and Access Statement and found the indicative design and layout was not in keeping with the surrounding area and that the proposed flats would not contribute to a high quality, sustainable living environment or have a positive impact on the setting of neighbouring properties.

The Reporter found the proposal was contrary to ECLP. The Reporter then considered whether material considerations would justify approval.

The Reporter found the proposal would make only a limited contribution to the housing land supply and that SPP indicated the planning system should aim to achieve the right development in the right place; not to allow development at any cost. The Reporter accepted the site would contribute to housing in a sustainable location but that did not outweigh his concerns about the loss of open space and the failure to safeguard allotments as required by SPP.

The Reporter then considered the emerging LDP and found that while the shortfall in housing land supply carried considerable weight it did not over-ride other considerations, such as the protection of open space. The Reporter noted the examination report did not identify the site for housing land despite the identified shortfall in housing land.

The Reporter acknowledged the appellant appeared to offer a compromise rather than develop the whole site for housing but found it did not justify the significant reduction in the amount of open space currently used as allotments. The small contribution the development would make towards the five year effective land supply did not outweigh the failure to comply with local plan and SPP policies in relation to the protection of open space.