4.5  Armed with those iterative criteria Mr Stagg spent 18 months searching the wider area for such a site. The extent of his efforts in that search was not challenged in cross-examination. Having gone through that process the best site was identified as the Nether Alderley site. Whilst that site is located in the green belt in all other respects the criteria were met.

4.6  That such a search exercise was robust can be tested thus - the Local Planning Authority has not at any time sought to identify a single 'more appropriate' site either within or beyond its borders. The most that can be said is that Mr Stagg has not looked at the whole of the England in his search - i.e. in those areas in which he would never have wished to build the Hall in any event.

4.7  Perhaps the most important criteria is the one which is most easily overlooked - namely would the intrinsic physical qualities of the appeal site permit an appropriate setting to be created for the Hall. To that end opinion appears to be consistent from the Macclesfield Historical Society who declare that the choice is inspired to the Local Planning Authority who describe the proposed context as 'appropriate' to the setting of the Hall. In other words whatever criticism may be levelled at the search, the out-turn is a site in which the project could be successfully established. That of itself is a powerful material consideration.

5.  Other Benefits
5.1  Whilst it is agreed that a change from an access with limited visibility to an access with improved visibility and lower flows is unlikely to be determinative it would be wrong to dismiss the issue out of hand.

5.2  Similarly to suggest that the carefully designed landscaping scheme which would, on any view (save for the proof of Mr Malcolm) result in clear enhancements to the landscape and the ecology of the area as being 'peripheral' is disingenuous in the extreme. Both forms of enhancement would not otherwise be achieved and are a significant benefit of the proposal.

6.  Conclusions
6.1  Ultimately this case turns upon the balance of the inappropriateness of the development in policy terms as against the clear benefits of the scheme. That requires you Sir to form your own judgement as to the weight to be given to those considerations.

6.2  However before undertaking that dispassionate exercise the Appellant would invite you Sir to consider the position some years hence if the appeal is allowed. Not only does Mr Kelsall consider that the Hall would have become a cherished part of the landscape but he considers that it may very well have been re-listed. Such a view is with respect compelling. Thus, whilst the empty field would undoubtedly preserve the openness of the green belt were the appeal to be dismissed it is hard to see that in the long term how that would have served the public interest if the price of that preservation is the permanent loss of Sandown Hall to the nation.

Paul G Tucker
Kings Chambers
Manchester
27^th October 2004