Why did my planning application get rejected? Newbold Astbury cum Moreton, Cheshire East
Why did my Planning Application Get Rejected? Newbold Astbury cum Moreton, Cheshire East
Nestled amidst the serene landscapes of Cheshire East, Newbold Astbury cum Moreton encapsulates the quintessential charm of rural England. The region's planning processes, rigorous yet essential, seek to preserve its unique character. For aspirant homeowners left puzzled by a planning application denial, it's crucial to understand the distinct standards that underscore the village's decision-making approach. Here’s a breakdown of the most frequent issues that led to refusals from January to August 2023.
1. Safeguarding the Green Belt's Integrity:
Newbold Astbury cum Moreton holds the Green Belt in high regard, recognising it as a crucial barrier against unbridled urban sprawl. A common reason for rejection has been proposed developments perceived as encroachments into this space. Such projects that potentially harm the Green Belt's openness, or significantly increase on-site activity, find themselves at odds with Policy PG3 of the Cheshire East Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
2. Conservation of Rural Aesthetic:
In a place where traditional architecture speaks volumes, introducing materials like black/grey natural stained timber or Corten steel that exude a commercial, contemporary flair can lead to pushbacks. Projects that seemingly mar the conventional beauty of the locale and challenge policies such as SE1, SD2, and GEN1 of the Cheshire East Local Plan or P4 of the Astbury and Moreton Neighbourhood Plan, often face rejections.
3. Addressing Flood Risk Concerns:
Development proposals sometimes underestimate the village's commitment to managing and preventing flood risks. The lack of sufficient information about a development's impact on local waterways and flood zones can lead to refusals, highlighting non-compliance with Policy SE13 of the Cheshire East Local Plan and ENV16 of the Site Allocations and Development Policies Document.
4. Evaluating Rural Employment Needs:
The council rigorously assesses the genuine need for rural workers to live on-site. Proposals often fall through if they cannot conclusively demonstrate the functional and financial viability of the enterprise, or if they contradict the PG6 policy of the Cheshire East Local Plan and the NPPF.
5. Ensuring Suitable Materials and Design for Equestrian Structures:
The village stands vigilant against developments that, though posed as equestrian facilities, could later transition into non-equestrian uses due to their design or material choices. Such proposals end up clashing with Policy RUR7 of the Site Allocations and Development Policies Document.
6. Commitment to Biodiversity:
Any development threatening local hedgerows or potentially leading to a biodiversity loss stands a high chance of refusal. Such projects challenge policies like SE3, SE5, ENV1, and ENV2 of the Cheshire East Local Plan and P12 of the Astbury and Moreton Neighbourhood Plan.
In Conclusion...
Facing a rejection for a planning application in Newbold Astbury cum Moreton prompts reflection and adaptation. Delving into the heart of this village's distinct ethos and aligning with its vision is pivotal. By embracing the village's specific stipulations and adjusting designs accordingly, aspiring homeowners can elevate their chances of seeing their architectural dreams seamlessly woven into the fabric of Newbold Astbury cum Moreton.
