“The site is outside the settlement framework and lies in the open countryside. The proposed housing has not been justified with any reference to any essential need and would have a significant urbanising impact on the countryside. As such residential development is considered to be unnecessary development in the countryside in an unsustainable location. The proposal is therefore contrary to the requirements of policies HOU 2, ENV 3 and HOU 9 of the Bolsover District Local Plan and the policies of the National Planning Policy Framework.”
“7. The parties to an appeal under section 18(1) of the 1961 Act (as amended) are: (a) the person for the time being entitled to [an interest in land in respect of which the local planning authority have served a section 17 certificate], or 4 (b) any authority possessing compulsory purchase powers by whom that interest is proposed to be, or is, acquired.’ In this case confusion has arisen because the local planning authority and the acquiring authority are not the same authority. The proper respondent to an appeal made by the person entitled to an interest in the land is the acquiring authority. The local planning authority, whose decision is the subject of the appeal, is not a party to the appeal under section 18 of the 1961 Act. Care should be taken by appellants when submitting a notice of appeal under section 18 to ensure that the acquiring authority is named as the respondent to the appeal.”
“where a blight notice has been accepted and a deemed notice to treat served but entry onto the land has not yet been taken, the relevant valuation date is still in the future. This presents obvious difficulties in considering what might be appropriate alternative development at that time.”
“In the absence of any provision dealing with a deemed notice to treat it is necessary to have regard to section 5A(3). Subsection (a) does not apply because possession has not yet been taken. Subsection (b) only applies when the valuation assessment has been made, an assessment which it appears the parties wish to achieve by negotiation. In my opinion, in circumstances such as these where a section 18 appeal has been made before entry has been taken, and where the Tribunal is not being invited to determine the compensation payable at the same time, the appellant must be taken to be willing to have the terms of the CAAD determined on the basis of policy at the date of determination. That is the closest date to the date of entry for which a policy framework can reliably be identified and without speculating about future policy changes. One way of looking at it might be to say that, by bringing the appeal when they have, the appellants have waived the right to rely on any relevant changes of policy which might occur before the date of entry or assessment.”
“c) [approve] development proposals that accord with an up-to-date development plan without delay; or “d) where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out-of-date, [grant] planning permission unless: i. the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or ii. any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole.”
“Development in the countryside Outside settlement frameworks planning permission will only be granted for development which : 1) is necessary in such a location; or 2) is required for the exploitation of sources of renewable energy; or 3) would result in a significant improvement to the rural environment; or 4) would benefit the local community through the reclamation or re-use of land. Permission will only be granted in such cases provided it is demonstrated that: a) the location of the development outside the settlement framework is environmentally sustainable; and b) the proposed development, either individually, or cumulatively with recently completed developments and outstanding planning permissions, would not seriously undermine the vitality and viability of existing town or local centres; and c) the proposed development would not materially harm the rural landscape and avoid unnecessary urbanisation and sprawl; and d) the proposed development would avoid the coalescence of distinct settlements.”
“Policy SS9: Development in the Countryside Development proposals in the countryside outside development envelopes will only be granted planning permission where it can be demonstrated that they fall within one or more of the following categories a) Involve a change of use or the re-use of vacant, derelict or previously developed land b) Are necessary for the efficient or viable operation of agriculture, horticulture, forestry and other appropriate land-based businesses, including the diversification of activities on an existing farm unit c) Are small scale employment uses related to local farming, forestry recreation, or tourism d) Secure the retention and / or enhancement of a community facility e) Secure the retention and / or enhancement of a vacant or redundant building that makes a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the area and can be converted without complete or substantial reconstruction f) Are in accordance with a made Neighbourhood Development Plan 17 g) The building is of exceptional quality or innovative design h) In all cases, where development is considered acceptable it will be required to respect the form, scale and character of the landscape, through careful location, design and use of materials.”
“Support will be given to proposals which would provide facilities, opportunities or accommodation for visitors to the District, both in terms of business trips and tourism related visits. Such proposals would be particularly welcome in Bolsover Town. Existing tourist facilities and infrastructure will be protected and enhanced including those at Bolsover Castle, Creswell Crags, Hardwick Hall, Stainsby Mill, Pinxton Canal, Pleasley Pit and the multi-user trails network. The majority of new tourism facilities, not directly related to a specific tourist destination, will be directed towards the towns, emerging towns and large villages. Tourism proposals will be promoted and supported where: a) They contribute to the achievement of regeneration aims and objectives b) Development is at a scale which is in keeping with local character and which preserves or enhances the quality of the natural and built environment c) Visitor attractions that could attract large numbers of people are accessible by a choice of means of transport, and offer good access by non-car modes.”