Hucknall: Planning permission for a large family home to be built in the grounds of nearby Newstead Abbey refused

A planning inspector has ruled against plans to build a large five-bedroom family home within the grounds of Newstead Abbey.

Gedling Borough Council objected to the development on the grounds that it would affect Green Belt land.

The proposal was to demolish a single storey stone clad two-bedroom home with a number of outbuildings and create a five-bedroom family home.

The home would be accessed from Station Avenue within the wider Newstead Abbey Park grounds, which contains a number of Grade II listed buildings and is within Nottinghamshire's Green Belt.

The abbey itself, which is just over five miles away from Hucknall, was first founded as a medieval priory and is most famous for being the home of poet Lord Byron in the early 19th century.

The existing bungalow, was built in the 1960s and is not listed.

Developers said it is of 'a low-quality design' and doesn't 'respect or enhance the character of the area'.

The proposal was for a five-bedroom family home including ensuite bedrooms, a lounge, kitchen/dining/sitting area, utility and storeroom, study, plant room as well as a double garage.

Planning permission was refused by Gedling Borough Council on April 9.

It was the opinion of the local authority the proposal would result in the construction of a replacement home in the Green Belt which would have "a significantly greater floor area than the original dwelling."

An appeal against this decision was lodged with the Planning Inspectorate. But this appeal has been dismissed and is set to be noted at a Gedling Borough Council planning committee meeting on Wednesday, December 1.

The report includes the planning inspector's conclusion, stating that the frontage of the new house would "encroach" into an area which is currently undeveloped.

The planning inspector said: "The proposed dwelling cannot reasonably be considered to be anything other than materially larger.

"In this instance the effect of the cumulative increased size of the built development would clearly be experienced both visually and spatially. For this reason, the proposed development would compromise and significantly harm the openness of the Green Belt, in that it would be reduced.

"I have given considerable weight to the material consideration in respect of the improved sustainability of the replacement dwelling and limited weight to the other considerations cited in support of the proposal.

"However, I conclude these circumstances do not clearly outweigh the substantial weight I must give to the overall harm the scheme would cause.

"Consequently, very special circumstances that are necessary to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt do not exist."