A GOVERNMENT planning inspector has dismissed an appeal to build 30 homes on green belt land in Tilbury, concluding the scheme would cause unacceptable harm to the openness of the countryside and failed to meet national policy tests.

Developers had sought outline permission for up to 30 dwellings at Kipling Farm, off Kipling Avenue, proposing a mix of houses and flats with new access points from both Kipling Avenue and Pepys Close. Thurrock Council planning officers refused the application, prompting the appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

Following a site visit in January the inspector has issued a decision upholding the council's refusal, finding the land could not be classed as "grey belt" and therefore did not qualify for relaxed development rules introduced in the 2024 National Planning Policy Framework.

The inspector said the site "contributes strongly" to one of the green belt's key purposes — preventing the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas — and therefore failed the definition of grey belt land set out in government policy. While part of the northern area of the site was being used for storage of vehicles and miscellaneous items, the inspector found there was insufficient evidence this amounted to permanent development.

As a result, the scheme was judged to be inappropriate development in the green belt, which can only be approved in "very special circumstances". The inspector concluded that the benefits of up to 30 new homes, including 50 per cent affordable housing, did not outweigh the harm to the green belt.

The report also found the scheme would significantly reduce openness, with 30 residential properties, access roads, parking areas and associated domestic activity altering the character of the largely open site.

The council had previously raised concerns about whether education and healthcare contributions would be sufficient.

The ruling means Thurrock Council's original refusal stands. Despite the borough's acknowledged "severe" housing shortfall, the inspector said green belt protections provided a clear reason for dismissing the proposal.

advertisement

Categories: Planning Permission

Au