“… (a) the preservation of the Cloakham Lawn parkland and meadows as an open space and recreational facility and to promote the provision of a North-South relief road for Axminster. (b) any other trade or business which may seem to the company and its directors to be advantageous and to directly or indirectly enhance all or any of the business of the company.”
“The site has an area of 18.9 hectares predominately in use as rough agricultural grassland but does include the Cloakham Lawns Sports Centre towards the western half of the site which has a single track access running centrally through the site to the A358 Chard Road and which is also a public footpath. To the northern end of the site there are a group of agricultural buildings on a raised plateau with an access directly to the Chard Road …. The Cloakham Lawns Sports Club comprises two cricket fields, bowling green (with associated building) and a main building with car park. There are also a couple of tennis courts, a skate park and play area to the western boundary adjacent to the footpath and the railway line…”
“1 It is arguable that the decision ought to have been made by reference to existing policy rather than future policy, even when the latter was available in draft, and perhaps particularly when the latter was the subject of mandatory consultation at the time the decision was made. Permission is therefore granted on ground 2. 2 I would not have granted permission on ground 1 alone because section 38 (6) permits departure from policy where there are other material considerations outweighing the policy, and there can be little doubt that the report for the members of the Committee (at p180 of the claimant’s bundle) identifies factors capable of supporting departure. It is perhaps just arguable that the decision itself failed to justify the departure and in the circumstances I grant permission on ground 1 ….”
“ …. An allegation that an Inspector’s conclusion on the planning merits is Wednesbury perverse is, in principle, within the scope of a challenge under section 288, but the court must be astute to ensure that such challenges are not used as a cloak for what is, in truth, a rerun of the arguments on the planning merits ….”
“…. the law has always made a clear distinction between the question of whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it should be given. The former is a question of law, and the latter is a matter of planning judgment, which is entirely a matter for the planning authority. Provided that the planning authority has regard to material considerations, it is at liberty (provided that it does not lapse into Wednesbury irrationality) to give them whatever weight the planning authority thinks fit or no weight at all. The fact that the law regards something as a material consideration therefore involves no view about the part, if any, which it should play in the decision making process. This distinction between whether something is a material consideration and the weight which it should be given is only one aspect of a fundamental principle of British planning law, namely that the courts are concerned only with the legality of the decision making process and not with the merits of the decision. If there is one principle of planning law more firmly settled than any other, it is that matters of planning judgment are within the exclusive province of the local Planning Authority or the Secretary of State ….”
“…. a planning officer reporting to and advising council members who are to make a relevant decision must keep the test in mind in the information and advice he provides and in the manner in which he provides it. Clear mindedness and clarity of expression are obviously important. However that is not to say that a report is to be construed as if it were a statute or that defects of presentation can often render a decision made following its submission to the Council liable to be quashed. The overall fairness of the report, in the context of a statutory test, must be considered….”
“…. In my judgment an application for judicial review based on criticisms of the planning officer’s report will not normally begin to merit consideration unless the overall effect of the report significantly misleads the committee about material matters which thereafter are left uncorrected at the meeting of the planning committee before the relevant decision is taken.”
“Whilst planning officers’ reports should not be equated with inspectors’ decision letters, it is well established, that in construing the latter it has to be remembered that they are addressed to the parties who will be well aware of the issues that have been raised in the appeal. They are thus addressed to a knowledgeable readership and the adequacy of their reasoning must be considered against that background. That approach applies with particular force to a planning officer’s report to a committee. Its purpose is not to decide the issues, but to inform the members of the relevant considerations relating to the application. It is not addressed to the world at large but to council members who, by virtue of that membership, may be expected to have substantial local and background knowledge. There would be no point in a planning officer’s report setting out in great detail background material, for example, in respect of the local topography, development planning policies or matters of planning history if the members were only too familiar with that material. Part of a planning officer’s expert function in reporting to the committee must be to make an assessment of how much information needs to be included in his or her report in order to avoid burdening a busy committee with excessive and unnecessary detail ....”
“In dealing with such an application the authority shall have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material to the application, and to any other material considerations.”
“If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.”
“The countryside is defined as all those parts of the plan area outside the Built-up Area Boundaries for towns and villages shown on the Proposals Map. The “countryside” also specifically excludes areas that may not currently be developed but have been explicitly allocated for a specific use in plan policy. Development in the countryside will only be permitted where in accordance with a specific Local Plan policy that explicitly permits such development and where it would not harm the distinctive landscape, amenity and environmental qualities within which it is located, including: 1 Land form and patterns of settlement; 2 Important natural and manmade features, which contribute to the local landscape character, including topography, traditional field boundaries, areas of importance for nature conservation and rural buildings; and 3 The adverse disruption of a view from a public place which forms part of the distinctive character of the area or otherwise causes significant visual intrusions.”
“Pre-application discussions are critically important and benefit both developers and local planning authorities in ensuring a better mutual understanding of objectives and the constraints that exist. In the course of such discussions proposals can be adapted to ensure that they better reflect community aspirations and that applications are complete and address all the relevant issues. Local planning authorities and applicants should take a positive attitude towards early engagement in pre-application discussions so that formal applications can be dealt with in a more certain and speedy manner and the quality of decisions can be better assured.”
“Members ….. had received a tour of potential sites for development in Axminster ….”
“…. 2) that Persimmon Homes be invited to make a presentation to the LDF Panel in respect of land at Axminster….”
“First however, it should be noted that this site was being considered by the Members Pre-app Panel ahead of the Council’s Local Development Framework Core Strategy preferred Options document being published for public consultation. This document will deal with the strategy for allocating large scale housing developments (amongst other things) both in terms of which settlements will be chosen for future growth and at what scale. This will of course be informed by the draft Regional Strategy (as it stands at present). Consequently, at this point in time, the site can only be considered on its merits against the current policy background as contained in the adopted East Devon Local Plan. However the Council is aware that there is a strong need to secure new housing development, especially affordable housing, which is the Council’s top priority for delivery. The consideration of large scale “Departure” applications are therefore being looked at but only on a case by case basis at present…. …. There is clearly much more work to be done to produce an acceptable scheme for this site. Whilst some members had clear reservations about the development of this site the view of the Council remains that there is potential for this site to come forward provided the issues set out above can be adequately resolved…. …. The comments expressed above are of course wholly without prejudice to any formal application being submitted and will not prevent the Council from taking into account any views expressed by interested third parties and statutory consultees such as Axminster Town Council who I understand are opposed to the proposed development….”
“…. The Panel wished to make it clear that any steer from the Panel was without prejudice to the subsequent determination by the Development Control Committee…”
“Pre-application meetings and presentations to LDF Committee”
“Preferred Policy Approach – Draft CS14 Development at Axminster The preferred approach for Axminster will support and reinforce the town’s role as a self-contained medium-sized town, serving the employment, commercial and community service needs of the settlement and its rural surroundings. Over the 2011 to 2026 period, we will promote and plan for: 1 New Homes – encourage the build – out of existing commitments to development for 580 homes, and allocate a site at Cloakham Lawns for up to 400 houses; 2 Jobs – protect existing and allocated (6.5 hectares) employment land and require further new provision (2 ha) by site allocation Land Allocations development plan document; 3 Town Centre – promote the regeneration of the Webster Garage site and adjoining land to support commercial activity, enhance the public realm and address traffic congestion issues; 4 Transport – support the provision of better sustainable (non-car) transportation, including footpaths, cycle routes and bus services both within the town and to link with the countryside and other settlements, and introduce through – route large vehicle traffic management measures; 5 Infrastructure – ensure good quality accessible recreational facilities, and secure drainage improvements for the town, to mitigate the likely environmental impact of new housing; and 6 Environment – make sure that any development includes safeguards so that there are no, or very limited effects, on protected wildlife and habitat in the Axminster area.”
“The application has been advertised as a Departure due to its location outside the built up area boundary as defined in the East Devon Plan ….”
“Settlement Policy The application site currently lies outside the built up area boundary at Axminster as defined within the East Devon Local Plan 1995-2011 …. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the current policy S5 of the East Devon Local Plan which limits development in the countryside to that which accords with a specific local plan policy.”
“…. Members will need to decide whether the principal policy objection relating to the current Local Plan is outweighed by the benefits that this development may bring which is deliverable and reflects the Council’s vision for Axminster …”
“Affordable Housing Policy H4 of the Local Plan requires that housing developments in area centres should be provided at a minimum of 40%. It has to be remembered however that this is a Departure site and it is usual to seek an excess of 40% for such sites. It is proposed however by the applicant to provide 40% affordable housing on the site, for a development of approximately 400 dwellings, this would equate to approximately 160 dwellings. It is intended that 70% of the affordable housing will be rented and the remaining 30% be a shared equity or similar intermediate housing. The phasing for the provision of affordable housing would need to be controlled through a Section 106 Agreement. The offer of 40% affordable housing with 70% to be rented, is the least that might be expected, that will provide valuable, affordable housing within Axminster. It should be made clear however that this should not be dependent on grant aid.”
“…. It is therefore for the members to decide whether the benefits of the development outweigh the current policy issues bearing in mind the desired direction of the Council towards this site. The primary corporate policy of the Council is affordable housing and this development would provide 40% of much needed affordable dwellings. The application will also secure in perpetuity the retention of the Cloakham Lawns Sports Club together with some financial contribution to enhancement works ….”
“…. The recent published consultation document includes an allocation for residential development on the Cloakham Lawns site. However the Core Strategy is in its very early stages and should therefore be attributed limited weight as a material consideration.”
“…. The preferred approach document is therefore at a reasonably early stage in the preparation of the core strategy but nevertheless it is a good indication of the approach the Council will make in future years to development proposals. It therefore carries some weight in the decision process and is a material consideration …..”
“2 Whilst the site is currently outside the built-up area boundary as defined in the East Devon Local Plan, the Preferred Policy Approach – draft CS14 identifies the site at Cloakham Lawns for up to 400 houses. The Core Strategy for the LDF is in an early stage of preparation but the Preferred Approach clearly identifies the Council’s position and strategy for housing in Axminster for future years and should therefore be accorded some limited weight …. … 4 The benefits of the proposal is helping to achieve the corporate policies of the Council and other benefits to the local community, outweigh the current settlement policy of the Council.”
“ …. This is a piecemeal development with no clear demand or need within the town…. …. The growth of Axminster should be through the LDF process. …. By submitting an application out of sync with the proper LDF process does not allow other sites to be suggested and considered; the application is therefore premature. …. This development would put off the additional development that would fund the much needed relief road to the east of the town.”
“Following consideration of any comments received, and amendments, where appropriate, we will produce the submitted version of the statement of community involvement on which formal responses will be sought.”