The Planning Inspectorate has dismissed an appeal by developers against Swale Council’s decision to refuse permission for houses to be built on land to the East of Cellar Hill in Lynsted.
In his judgment, Inspector John Felgate ruled the development would cause harm to the character, appearance and significance of the Cellar Hill and Greenstreet Conservation Area (CA), and to the settings of the many listed buildings in the immediate vicinity. This was due to the loss of the site’s undeveloped nature, and the visual contribution that the site makes to these heritage assets.
As such, the scheme would conflict with Swale Council Policies CP8, DM32 and DM33, which together seek to sustain, preserve and enhance the significance of heritage assets and their setting - and all features that contribute positively to a CA’s special character or appearance, including the layout of streets and spaces.
The Inspector acknowledged that the potential harm to designated heritage assets would be ‘less than substantial’, but nevertheless real. NPPF paragraph 199 requires that great weight is given to the conservation of heritage assets. Whilst the proposed scheme would have some public benefits - in the form of housing provision, a net gain in biodiversity plus economic and social benefits - these were outweighed by the identified harm to the CA and listed buildings, and their significance.
In terms of design, the Inspector considered the scheme for five new homes to be in many respects exemplary. The individual designs are tasteful and well detailed, and the layout would make for an attractive overall grouping. However, he considered that to judge the scheme only in these terms would be to disregard the positive value that the site currently brings to the CA and listed building settings.
The appeal site lies within 6km of the Swale Special Protection Area (SPA), which is designated under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, because of its importance for birdlife. The Inspector ruled that the lack of mitigation for the development’s potential impact on the SPA added further weight against the scheme.
He concluded: "The development would not harm highway safety, or the character and appearance of the countryside, or of Cellar Hill as a rural lane, but all of these matters are neutral. Overall, despite the District’s need for more housing sites, in this case the conflict that I have found with the development plan is not outweighed by this or any of the other material considerations. The appeal therefore fails and is dismissed”.
The full Appeal decision can be found HERE