The final legal challenge to the proposed development at Kedleston Hall has been quashed after campaigners were denied a final appeal at the Supreme Court.
The proposals for residential development on the 17-hectare site, which is 550 metres away from the National Trust property, was refused by Amber Valley Borough Council in 2015, but allowed at appeal in August 2016. A High Court Judge then overturned that decision on the basis that the inspector had made an 'error of law' by not considering the historic, social and economic connections between the Hall and the development site and that they had taken a 'too narrow' view of the setting of the Hall.
At the Court of Appeal, the decision was reversed again in July 2018 to allow the proposals, with the Judge stating that the Planning Inspector had not made an 'error of law' and had not taken a too narrow approach to defining the setting of Kedleston Hall. Campaigners had since sought to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court, but they have not been allowed a final appeal.
Throughout, this case has hinged on the definition of the setting of a heritage asset. It has been stipulated that there does not have to be a visual link between an asset and a site for it to be considered part of its setting, and that other factors, such as historic land ownership and use should also be considered. However, while these sound similar factors to the consideration of curtilage issues, it must be stressed that setting and curtilage are very different matters and that setting can be much more far ranging and fluid.
For more information on the setting of listed buildings, or any heritage related planning issues, please contact the Bidwells heritage team.