THE inspector who carried out the public inquiry in Satnam’s appeal between April 23 and August 13 spelled out his reasons for rejecting the scheme in his formal decision notice.
Richard Schofield listed a number of important issues:
*The appeal proposal failed to demonstrate that it would not create an adverse impact upon the safety and efficiency of the local and strategic highway network.
*He said the evidence provided lacked clarity in a number of areas while the appeal site was in a very sensitive location regarding air quality management and the proposal failed to show it would not give rise to an adverse impact on local air quality.
*The proposal would have an adverse impact upon the character of the area which, as the site was built out, would gradually change to become a busier and, for pedestrians at least, noisier area through which to travel.
*The scheme could not be regarded as deliverable because the appellant did not have control of the entirety of the appeal site and did not appear to have support from a bus operator to run a proposed service through the site.
*Without evidence that the Mill Lane playing field site being available for the development it was difficult to see how the scheme could be regarded as deliverable as there was no reason to consider that the site would be sold to the appellant.
The Secretary of State has agreed with the opinions of the appeal inspector.
Satnam have the right to appeal against the decision, by applying to the High Court within six weeks.
