Latest Jobs
- Planning Policy Manager
- South East England
- £43,035 - £48,438
- Head of Housing and Planning
- North West England
- Package up to c.£60k
- Senior Development Control Planner
- East of England
- £18 - £23 Per Hour
- CABE Enabling panel
- Central London
- Environment Officer
- North West England
- £19,126 - £21,519
- Head of Planning
- East Midlands
- £44,411 - £49,866p.a.
- Senior Development Control Officer
- East of England
- £29,236 - £35,321
- Project Manager (Planning Business Process and E-Planning)
- £19-£27 per hour
- Planning Policy Officer
- South East England
- £24,012 - £32,604*
- Principal Planner (Policy)
- South East England
- up to £35,430 p.a.
Planning, 15 August 2008
The demolition of a former industrial building in a Northamptonshire village conservation area to allow mixed redevelopment of the site has been rejected because of the structure's historic importance.
The site comprised the sole surviving historic iron foundry in Northamptonshire. English Heritage advised that it was a rare historic relic and maintained that while it did not merit listing, its local interest meant that it was just the sort of building that conservation area legislation was designed to protect.
The inspector acknowledged that the site was an important reminder of the village's industrial heritage and made a significant contribution to the historic townscape. PPG15 advises that the general presumption should be in favour of retention in such circumstances, he remarked.
He acknowledged that the former foundry had serious structural problems but found no compelling case for its demolition. Because pollutants were contained on the site, he gave little weight to the benefits of contaminated land remediation. He also found that the appeal proposal's siting on the high street would harm the historic townscape.
The inspector judged that the benefits of the proposal were insufficient to outweigh the general presumption in favour of retaining the building. He was not convinced that all reasonable efforts had been made to find viable alternative uses and did not consider that the redevelopment would produce substantial community benefits that would outweigh the building's loss. He concluded that the developer's approach fell far short of the imaginative efforts advocated by PPG15 to find alternative uses or incorporate such buildings into new development.
DCS Number 100-056-448
Inspector John Woolcock; Inquiry.
This week's casebook
Get full decision
Latest News
- Neill blasts "ivory tower" planners
- Civic Trust award winners unveiled
- Boris gives green light to Brent Cross
- No call in for Bristol stadium plans
- Scottish planning award winners announced
- CBI calls for 'radical' congestion solutions
- PlanningBlog: Bob Neill's "ivory tower" attack
- Marine Energy plan published
- Briginshaw to take up HCA design role
- Farrell appointed Ashford design champion









