Cotswold council blasted for ‘waving white flag’ in 195 homes battle
A Gloucestershire council’s decision to “wave the white flag” and pull out of a public inquiry into plans for 195 homes near Moreton-in-Marsh has been blasted as “profoundly disappointing”.
Cotswold District Council (CDC) confirmed this week that it is withdrawing from a public inquiry into the proposed housing development off London Road in the market town.
This decision has been taken by council chiefs who have concluded that the national planning system now leaves them with little realistic chance of defending refusals of this kind.
The development was refused permission by councillors last year – on the recommendation of planning officers – because it was considered unsustainable at the time.
The council was prepared to defend that decision and had appointed external legal and planning experts to do so.
However, after a detailed review of the appeal evidence and further changes proposed by the government to national planning policy, the council says it has taken independent advice that should it continue to fight the appeal – due to be heard next week – it would now be very unlikely to succeed, carrying a significant risk of further costs falling on local taxpayers.
This decision has been met with anger and frustration in the town which is suffering the impact of new housing.
Conservative Councillor Daryl Corps, who represents the town at Shire Hall and Moreton West at the District Council, said the decision is “deeply troubling” and “profoundly disappointing”.
He believes it “sends a sinister chill across Moreton” and blasted the Government for forcing “bonkers” housing numbers into rural areas .
“The Lib Dem administration said they were building a war chest to fight exactly this kind of scenario,” he said, “it seems not for Moreton.
“Now it has come to it, they have backed down and caved in before an appeal that is still taking place next week and in doing so undermined the decision made by elected members of the planning committee who said loud and clear to Moreton.
“No! We refuse this application.
“Residents will rightly ask why they haven’t fought harder. A couple of letters from CDC fired off to the Secretary of State would never cut it.
“By CDC waving the white flag like this sends a very worrying signal across the district. Developers will be rubbing their hands in glee whilst sharpening their spades.
“CDC can’t just walk away, they should be insisting on a full environmental impact report that covers downstream impacts such as contamination. WIll that happen now they’ve walked away.”
Moreton Town Councillor Eileen Viviani said she was really surprised by the District Council’s decision.
She said the Town Council will be attending the appeal to put forward their view and “will try its best in the situation they are now in”.
“Our stance in respect of the inquiry was about having the opportunity to actually enable developers to understand the cumulative issues stemming from development that are apparent in our town,” she said.
“Sometimes developers look at individual planning applications and they tr to mitigate the harm in respect to that location and what they are doing.
“The problem is sometimes there is a knock on impact tin areas not directly where the development actually is.
“We regarded the inquiry as that opportunity to actually say to developers such as Bloor, you know, we are not Nimbys but we are facing a series of issues.
“And that is what we will do. The Town Council will attend the inquiry and represent the views the best it can for residents, businesses of the town to bring these issues to light.”
Helen Martin, director of communities and place at the District Council, said planners refused the application based on both the Government’s policy framework and evidence available at the time.
“Since then, further changes to national planning policy have been proposed and more evidence has emerged as the site has undergone testing,” she said.
“This means the Council’s ability to robustly defend the refusal at appeal has been significantly diminished.”
Ms Martin said that testing of the site had been taking place as part of the council’s work to update its Local Plan, in response to the Government’s housing targets. She said: “The council must leave no stone unturned as it bids to ensure the updated plan is found to be sound following submission later this year.”
Proposed policy changes, such as a strong presumption in favour of granting planning permission for housing development within walking distance of railway stations, and a higher bar for justifying refusals, have made challenging the appeal much more difficult. This is especially the case where benefits include housing numbers which contribute to housing requirements and affordability.
She noted that the ‘tilted balance’ has now shifted in favour of the development, because the harms no longer significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits brought by new housing.
Tilted balance is a policy approach in planning that favours granting permission for development when certain conditions are met, and which is much easier to trigger following significant increases to housing targets.
Liberal Democrat Council Leader Mike Evemy said: “This is not about a lack of resolve at a local level. We were prepared to fight this and had put in a significant amount of work to do so. This is about a planning system that is now deliberately set up to favour housing development, almost regardless of local concerns.
“Housing targets were increased before this application was refused, and since then the government has continued to move the goalposts through further proposed changes to national policy. The cumulative effect is that councils are being stripped of the ability to refuse speculative development.
“It is forcing us into an impossible choice: either concede developments we don’t support or spend vast sums of public money fighting appeals where the odds are stacked against us.”
Cllr Evemy added that this underlines the importance of pushing ahead at pace with a new Local Plan, and doing what needs to be done to ensure that plan is found to be sound. This remains the only realistic way to regain control over where and how development takes place.
This position was reiterated by the Government in its latest letter to Cllr Evemy, which acknowledged the constraints faced by the Cotswold district while stating that it must use the Local Plan process to set out its intentions in light of those constraints.
The District Council stressed it will continue to challenge proposals where there is clear and demonstrable harm but where it is no longer possible it will focus on securing the best possible outcomes for local communities.
The Government has pledged to build 1.5 million new homes during this Parliament and they claim to have already reversed the anti-supply measures in the national planning policy framework.
They say building thousands more good-quality homes in every region is the only way to fix the current situation where families are stuck in temporary accommodation and young people are locked out of home ownership.