X · Search match excluded: services mentioned, tier not referenced
—
“ongoing spending and support for local services”
A PiP for one dwelling on a lane about 400 m from Morchard Bishop, near a scattered linear group. It was dismissed. The council lacked a 5YHLS. The site was neither limited infilling (S5(1)(e)) nor physically well-related to the settlement (S5(1)(j)), and no HO11 circumstance applied. The inspector therefore used S5(4)'s reversed test. Substantial weight to housing (HO7) did not substantially outweigh the substantial-weight harm to sustainable movement.
This decision was picked up by the search on the words above, which refer to services, not to a settlement tier. generic.
Decision on the Planning Inspectorate appeals service · full decision note · letter pins-corpus/6012985.txt