Out-Law News 1 min. read
07 Jul 2016, 3:07 pm
St Albans City and District Council had refused outline planning permission for a proposal to redevelop the site of a former HSBC management and training centre, providing 129 new build homes and nine homes in refurbished buildings.
An appeal against the refusal was recovered for determination by the communities secretary because it involved a proposal for significant development in the green belt. Following an inquiry held in February, planning inspector Harold Stephens recommended that the appeal be allowed and permission granted for the scheme. A letter issued last week on behalf of Clark (71-page / 529 KB PDF) said the communities secretary agreed.
Clark found that the entire appeal site fell within the definition of 'previously developed land', so the scheme should not be considered 'inappropriate development' that must be justified by very special circumstances under the National Planning Policy Framework.
The communities secretary noted that the emerging St Albans Strategic Local Plan had not yet been submitted for examination and should attract only "limited weight". The development plan, therefore, comprised saved policies of the 1994 St Albans District Local Plan Review, the housing policies of which were considered out of date because the Council could not demonstrate a five year supply of land for housing.
The communities secretary gave "substantial weight" to the fact that the proposed development would represent a "marked reduction" in the built development on the site. He found that the appeal scheme would reduce the effects of the site on the openness of the green belt and would have "no material effect in terms of the purpose of safeguarding the countryside".
"Significant weight" was also given to the provision of 138 new homes in an area with a lack of available land for housing. The letter said the proposed development "would enhance the landscape character of the site and have a positive impact on its character and appearance".
Overall, Clark considered that the scheme was "generally consistent with the development plan as a whole with no adverse impacts that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when weighed against the [National Planning Policy] Framework as a whole".
Planning expert Jennifer Holgate of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com, said: "This decision is consistent with those that have preceded it and there is now a clear position established by the communities secretary. Of importance here is the distinction between previously developed land not being inappropriate development and therefore only requiring the usual balancing exercise to be undertaken, rather than engaging 'very special circumstances'. It is for all parties involved to very carefully interpret Section 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework, in order to be entirely comfortable that a project may fall within one of the designated exceptions."