In a blow to developers and a victory for local residents, the Planning Inspectorate has dismissed the appeal against North Hertfordshire Council's refusal of planning permission for development on land at New Pound Farm, Old Hale Way, Hitchin.

The application (ref. 24/02009/FP) sought permission for a residential development on fields adjacent to Old Hale Way, on land forming part of New Pound Farm. The appeal followed the council's refusal, based on concerns about the impact on the surrounding area and adherence to policy.

Documents submitted to the council (and now in the appeal bundle) show a contested and detailed battle over the future of this parcel of land. democracy.north-herts.gov.uk

In the Inspector's decision, several factors weighed heavily against the scheme:

Green Belt / openness

The land falls within, or near, areas where development would be seen as encroaching on the countryside. Introducing housing onto open fields would reduce the openness of the landscape and weaken the boundary between built form and agricultural land.

Character and appearance

The scale, massing, and design of the proposed buildings would have been at odds with the existing character of the locale. The inspector found that the visual harm would not be sufficiently mitigated by landscaping or buffer planting.

Harm vs public benefit balance

While the appellants likely presented arguments around housing need or contributions to local supply, the Inspector concluded that these benefits did not clearly outweigh the harms to Green Belt, landscape, and local character.

Other material considerations

Additional concerns included the precedent such a development might set, the impact on local infrastructure, and the lack of certainty over some proposed mitigation measures.

Because the harm could not be justified under the "very special circumstances" test required for inappropriate development in protected areas, the appeal was refused.

Local residents who opposed the original application are likely to welcome the decision, seeing it as a validation of their concerns about overdevelopment, loss of open space, and the pressures on roads and services.

For the developer, the ruling is a setback. But it may not be the end — they could pursue further action (e.g. judicial review) or submit a revised proposal with reduced scale or altered design to better address the inspector's objections.

For the council and planning officers, the decision reinforces the need for any future proposals in sensitive areas to make especially strong, evidence-backed arguments around mitigation, design, and compliance with local and national planning policy.