Plans for new homes in Twigworth have been allowed on appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

The plans for up to 85 new homes at Chestnut Tree Farm in Twigworth were turned down by Tewkesbury Borough Council in September 2023.

The case was then referred to the Planning Inspectorate and an inquiry was held in December. The appeal was made by L&Q Estates Ltd, executors of Michael Smith (deceased) Estate, Adrian Wilcox and Julian Smith against Tewkesbury Borough Council. The appeal decision to allow the development, subject to a number of conditions, has just been published.

The council refused planning permission because it had several issues with the proposals:

• Whether the proposed development would accord or conflict with the existing and emerging development plan policies for the area

• The effect the proposed development would have on the character and appearance of the area

• Loss of Best and Most Versatile agricultural land

• Extent of shortfall in five-year housing land supply (5YHLS)

• Whether any harm arising from the proposed development would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits

Tewkesbury Borough Council agreed the shortfall against the 5YHLS is 'significant' and that the weight to be given to provision of market rate and affordable housing is substantial.

But the council said the proposed development would result in an 'encroachment into the countryside' which would not be well-integrated with the existing settlement or the countryside beyond, and was therefore contrary to policies.

The inspectorate's view was that the adverse effect the development at Chestnut Tree Farm would have on the character and appearance of the area would be moderate.

The proposed development would result in the loss of approximately 4.2ha of Best and Most Versatile (BMV) agricultural land. This loss is below the threshold for consultation with Natural England (20ha) and is, therefore, described by Natural England as being 'smaller losses'.

The council argued that the best agricultural land is a finite resource and that smaller losses can be significant, while L&Q Estates Ltd argued there were negligible economic benefits and less than average food production benefits associated with the land.

M S Wiltshire, inspector, said: "Given the extent of the loss and the scale of the associated benefits, I favour the appellant's position. For these reasons, therefore, although there will be loss of BMV agricultural land, the area concerned is small, and I consider attracts little weight."

The council argued that the proposed development conflicted with a number of local policies. But because the 'tilted balance' (that planning permission should be granted unless there are adverse impacts) within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is engaged, the extent of shortfall in 5YHLS was a major factor in the inspector's decision making.

The inspector concluded: "The appeal scheme would bring a range of benefits, most notably the delivery of a substantial amount of market and affordable housing in an area which currently has issues with housing delivery, which together carry substantial weight in its favour... Adverse impacts would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits."

Development will begin when detailed plans showing the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping of the site have been submitted to and approved by Tewkesbury Borough Council.