The High Court has rejected two challenges by South Northamptonshire Council to planning permissions to build more than 250 homes in its area.
The latest ruling follows after a previous defeat over a 17-home development last December, with all three cases focused on the lawfulness of the approach taken by planning inspectors to the calculation of the five-year housing land supply for the area in the light of the National Planning Policy Framework, the development plan and the revoked East Midlands Regional Plan.
Setting out the Council’s case, he said: “In essence the claimant says that the figures the inspector used for housing need were from the revoked Regional Spatial Strategy which, on revocation, had become an irrelevant consideration.”
However, the judge upheld both July 2013 decisions under challenge before him – the first to approve Barwood Homes’ application for residential development of 35 homes on land north of Hampton Drive, Kings Sutton, Northamptonshire, and the second to grant outline consent to Barwood Land and Estates for a larger scheme for 220 houses at Catch Yard Farm, Towcester Road, Silverstone.
Dealing with the larger scheme in his main judgment, he said that the inspector had to make the best of an unsatisfactory situation with the RSS to be revoked, the local plan expired and the developing strategy subject to objection.
The Council had relied on a trajectory approach in its emerging strategy that would address a shortfall in the five-year target of 616 homes by increasing provision markedly at the end of the period and then over the remaining years of the strategy to 2026.
However, the judge ruled that the inspector was entitled to reject that approach. He said: “The inspector was entitled to regard it as undesirable for a shortfall in earlier years to be left till later in the plan period to be made good, and to hold that it should be made good earlier. This was a planning judgment to be made in the light of paragraph 47 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which looked for a significant and immediate boost to housing supply.”
He said that it was not wrong in principle for the inspector to use the evidence base of the revoked RSS, provided its figures were not used to enlarge the housing requirement beyond the full assessment of housing needs.
In a second judgment, he found that the inspector who approved the Barwood Homes application had also carried out a lawful exercise of planning judgment.
Last December, Lewis J rejected the Council’s challenge to the outline planning permission granted to Robert Plummer for 17 homes on a site south of Peace Hill and adjacent to The Leys, Bugbrooke, Northampton.
South Northamptonshire Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Administrative (Ouseley J) 10 March 2014
Caroline Bolton (instructed by South Northamptonshire Solicitors) for the claimant in both actions
Stephen Whale (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the first defendant in both actions
Richard Kimblin (instructed by DWF LLP) for the second defendant (Barwood Land and Estates Ltd) in the first action
Satnam Choongh and James Corbet Burcher (instructed by Bird Wilford & Sale) for the second defendant (Barwood Homes Ltd) in the second action
The High Court has rejected two challenges by South Northamptonshire Council to planning permissions to build more than 250 homes in its area. The latest ruling follows after a previous defeat over a 17-home development last December, with all three cases focused on the lawfulness of the approach taken by planning inspectors to the calculation of the five-year housing land supply for the area in the light of the National Planning Policy Framework, the development plan and the revoked East Midlands Regional Plan. Setting out the Council’s case, he said: “In essence the claimant says that the figures the inspector used for housing need were from the revoked Regional Spatial Strategy which, on revocation, had become an irrelevant consideration.” However, the judge upheld both July 2013 decisions under challenge before him – the first to approve Barwood Homes’ application for residential development of 35 homes on land north of Hampton Drive, Kings Sutton, Northamptonshire, and the second to grant outline consent to Barwood Land and Estates for a larger scheme for 220 houses at Catch Yard Farm, Towcester Road, Silverstone. Dealing with the larger scheme in his main judgment, he said that the inspector had to make the best of an unsatisfactory situation with the RSS to be revoked, the local plan expired and the developing strategy subject to objection. The Council had relied on a trajectory approach in its emerging strategy that would address a shortfall in the five-year target of 616 homes by increasing provision markedly at the end of the period and then over the remaining years of the strategy to 2026. However, the judge ruled that the inspector was entitled to reject that approach. He said: “The inspector was entitled to regard it as undesirable for a shortfall in earlier years to be left till later in the plan period to be made good, and to hold that it should be made good earlier. This was a planning judgment to be made in the light of paragraph 47 of the National Planning Policy Framework, which looked for a significant and immediate boost to housing supply.” He said that it was not wrong in principle for the inspector to use the evidence base of the revoked RSS, provided its figures were not used to enlarge the housing requirement beyond the full assessment of housing needs. In a second judgment, he found that the inspector who approved the Barwood Homes application had also carried out a lawful exercise of planning judgment. Last December, Lewis J rejected the Council’s challenge to the outline planning permission granted to Robert Plummer for 17 homes on a site south of Peace Hill and adjacent to The Leys, Bugbrooke, Northampton. South Northamptonshire Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Administrative (Ouseley J) 10 March 2014Caroline Bolton (instructed by South Northamptonshire Solicitors) for the claimant in both actionsStephen Whale (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the first defendant in both actionsRichard Kimblin (instructed by DWF LLP) for the second defendant (Barwood Land and Estates Ltd) in the first actionSatnam Choongh and James Corbet Burcher (instructed by Bird Wilford & Sale) for the second defendant (Barwood Homes Ltd) in the second action
