Vision Engineering Ltd v SoS Environment and Guildford BC
Vision Engineering Ltd v SoS Environment and Guildford BC
- 1991
- Journal of Planning and Environment Law 1991 JPL 951-956(3) .
QBD 18 January 1991. The applicants, V, carried on a high tech business from factory premises in green belt. V applied for outline planning permission to construct a two-storey extension for ancillary office space (appeal A) and a single storey extension for the same purpose (appeal B). V also applied for consent for vehicle access to a new unit under construction (appeal C). The inspector allowed appeal C but dismissed A and B. The decision letter indicated that the main issues were whether there were special circumstances to outweigh presumption against development in green belt and the effects of the proposal on neighbouring amenities in terms of noise, disturbance and outlook. The court compared this case with two other recent ones "Stewart v SoS Environment and Vale Royal DC" and "Pehrsson v SoS Environment and the Council of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead". It was held that the proposed development was not inappropriate to the green belt and the decision letter cou
EXTENSION
GREEN BELT
INAPPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING APPEALS
PLANNING PERMISSION
QBD 18 January 1991. The applicants, V, carried on a high tech business from factory premises in green belt. V applied for outline planning permission to construct a two-storey extension for ancillary office space (appeal A) and a single storey extension for the same purpose (appeal B). V also applied for consent for vehicle access to a new unit under construction (appeal C). The inspector allowed appeal C but dismissed A and B. The decision letter indicated that the main issues were whether there were special circumstances to outweigh presumption against development in green belt and the effects of the proposal on neighbouring amenities in terms of noise, disturbance and outlook. The court compared this case with two other recent ones "Stewart v SoS Environment and Vale Royal DC" and "Pehrsson v SoS Environment and the Council of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead". It was held that the proposed development was not inappropriate to the green belt and the decision letter cou
EXTENSION
GREEN BELT
INAPPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING APPEALS
PLANNING PERMISSION