Houghton v SoS Environment and Bromley LBC
Language: English Series: Journal of Planning and Environment Law ; [1996] JPL 396-405(10)Publication details: 1996Subject(s): Summary: QBD 12 January 1996. An application for planning permission to change the use of green belt woodland sited behind the applicant`s garden boundary to residential garden land including a tennis court, pavilion and mower store had been refused, a refusal which was upheld on appeal. Controversy centred on the interpretation of PPG2 paragraph 13 which allowed for the development of `outdoor sport` on green belt land. However even if the term encompassed private as well as public sport, the buildings constituted an unacceptable development and the whole project would set a precedent for neighbouring and similar properties. Appeal dismissed on grounds that such a development conflicted with the aim of the green belt, the UDP and the character of the woodland.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS55056 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 13860-1001 |
QBD 12 January 1996. An application for planning permission to change the use of green belt woodland sited behind the applicant`s garden boundary to residential garden land including a tennis court, pavilion and mower store had been refused, a refusal which was upheld on appeal. Controversy centred on the interpretation of PPG2 paragraph 13 which allowed for the development of `outdoor sport` on green belt land. However even if the term encompassed private as well as public sport, the buildings constituted an unacceptable development and the whole project would set a precedent for neighbouring and similar properties. Appeal dismissed on grounds that such a development conflicted with the aim of the green belt, the UDP and the character of the woodland.