Gladman’s appeal for Shear Brook dismissed!

“Jodrell Bank Observatory as an established world class facility should be afforded reasonable protection……the protection of Jodrell Bank Observatory as a facility of international importance transcends the housing land supply circumstances of the case.”

“…the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusion that even against Dr Trotta’s scenario, it has been reasonably demonstrated or ‘shown’ that the appeal development would impair the efficiency of the Jodrell Bank Radio Telescope such that it would conflict with Policy PS10 (IR268 and 271). The Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that Jodrell Bank Observatory as an established world class facility should be afforded reasonable protection (IR270), and considers that this proposal could damage the world class work being carried out by the Observatory (IR308). In his view the harm to the efficiency of the Radio Telescope carries substantial weight against the proposal.”

re Swanwick Hall  “…agrees with the Inspector that it would very substantially reduce the gap between the Hall and the village, significantly diminishing the current open undeveloped character of the area….this would significantly affect the setting of Swanwick Hall, causing harm to the significance of the listed building that would lie within the middle to higher end of the less than substantial harm spectrum……. The Secretary of State, in accordance with the s.66 duty, attributes considerable weight to this harm.”

“…agrees that the protection of Jodrell Bank Observatory as a facility of international importance transcends the housing land supply circumstances of the case. The Secretary of State therefore attaches considerable weight to Policy PS10.”

“….the Secretary of State considers that the Council’s housing land supply shortfall – while significant and set in a national planning policy context – is largely a local issue, while Jodrell Bank Observatory is a facility of international importance such that its protection from the identified harm transcends the current housing land supply circumstances. He considers that the harm to the efficiency of the Radio Telescope carries substantial weight against the proposal.”

Formal decision:

The Secretary of State, Sajid Javid, agreed with the Inspector’s recommendation and dismissed the appeal, refusing outline planning permission “for residential development comprising of up to 119 dwellings (including a minimum of 30% affordable housing), structural planting and landscaping, informal open space, surface water attenuation, a vehicular access point from Main Road and associated ancillary works, at land off Main Road, Goostrey, Cheshire, CW4 8LH, in accordance with application ref: 14/5579C, dated 28 November 2014.”

Woop woop!  

[click the link to read the Inspectors recommendation and Sec of State’s decision:   Decision/Outcome 24th Nov 2016]

NB The validity of the Secretary of State’s decision may be challenged, by making an application to the High Court within 6 weeks from today (25 Nov 2016) for leave to bring a statutory review under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

4 thoughts on “Gladman’s appeal for Shear Brook dismissed!

  1. And many thanks to the Parish Council, particularly Ken Morris who led the charge; we should remember that they are all volunteers and give a great deal of time and effort for the village.

  2. Yes very good news and very well done to all involved. Gladman don’t lose many of these appeals , they recently won a similar one in Holmes Chapel!!

    But this does make the point, very clearly, that large scale development in Goostrey village is not appropriate due to the proximity of Jodrell Bank!! The only mitigation is to build much further away from the telescope.

    ….Developers please take note…..!!.

    All of this could have been avoided if CE had recognized this point in the beginning and not made Goostrey a Local Service Centre. Landowners and developers would then not have gone to great expense planning developments which were not appropriate for the village …

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s