A reporter agreed that there was a shortfall in the 10-year landbank and the proposal would secure economic and other benefits. But the scheme would give rise to significantly adverse landscape and visual effects including on a special landscape area. The post-restoration form of the site was also an issue, he decided, with a planned waterbody likely to appear incongruous and conspicuous from nearby hills. Therefore, while some development plan policies supported the scheme, the harm outweighed the benefits and the appeal was dismissed.
Reporter: Robert Seaton; Written representations