Circular 16/87 — Test of agricultural land quality — Whether inspector applied test properly — Whether agricultural consideration properly sole issue — Application allowed
By a decision letter dated April 25 1990 the Secretary of State for the Environment, in accepting his inspector’s reasons and conclusions, dismissed the applicants’ appeal against the decision of the second respondents, Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, to refuse planning permission for residential development on land at Sandy Lane, Bramley, Rotherham. The applicants challenged the Secretary of State’s decision on the grounds that the inspector had dismissed their appeal solely by reference to an issue, namely agriculture, which had not been an issue at the inquiry. Further, the inspector had made no findings as to whether the land was the best and most versatile land in relation to agriculture and treated the grading of the land as an overriding consideration when it was only one of the relevant factors to be taken into account. He had failed to have proper regard to the policies in Circular 16/87, Development in Agricultural Land.
Held The application was allowed.
Under the agricultural land classification, the land in question was class 3A. It was not possible to decide if this was the best and most versatile without determining if there was any class 1 or 2 in the area. Accordingly, the inspector had failed to apply the test in Circular 16/87 of determining the “best and most versatile” agricultural land. There was no evidence before the inspector to give additional weight to the agricultural considerations.
Richard Phillips QC and Andrew Tait (instructed by Walker Morris Scott Turnbull, of Leeds) appeared for the applicants; and John Steel (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) appeared for the respondent.
