The main issue for the inspector was whether the location of the development outside a village served by an extensive range of services and facilities, including primary and secondary schools, was accessible by sustainable modes of transport. The highway authority accepted the appellants' appeal evidence that a walking route between the site and these local facilities could be delivered. The inspector also noted existing bus services and a financial contribution towards the cost of transporting primary pupils to alternative education facilities for seven school years in the light of the primary school being at capacity. Overall, the inspector concluded the site would be readily accessible by sustainable modes of travel.
Giving substantial weight to the contribution to both market and affordable housing for the district in the absence of a five-year housing land supply, and after careful consideration of local representations that included a petition against the development, the inspector concluded the appeal proposal would, subject to S106 planning obligations, be sustainable development and allowed the appeal.
Inspector: Y Wright; Inquiry