CALA to challenge Pickles' planning refusal for 2,000-home Winchester scheme

CALA originally submitted an application for the development at the beginning of 2010. Now, after a year and half of legal wrangling between CALA, the Winchester City Council and the Government, CALA has launched its latest challenge to the Secretary of State's decision to refuse permission under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act.

In its challenge CALA claimed that the Secretary of State's refusal to grant planning permission for the Winchester scheme in September 2011, against the recommendation of his planning inspector and his conclusions on policy and housing supply, incorrectly interpreted planning law on seven separate counts.

The Communities Secretary refused planning permission for the development scheme, reasoning that the Council’s emerging core strategy and consultation needed time to develop. In view of this CALA intend to argue ‘prematurity’ and that his decision afforded too much weight to the emerging core strategy for Winchester, at the expense of existing plans.

“Government has made it clear that its intention is to return decision making powers in housing and planning to local authorities. In this particular case it is important to give Winchester the opportunity to complete its [core strategy] process,” commented Pickles in his decision letter.

However, ministerial advice on prematurity states that where a core strategy is only at the consultation stage, a decision based on prematurity is unlikely to succeed.

"Where a DPD (development plan document) is at the consultation stage, with no early prospect of submission for examination, then refusal on prematurity grounds would seldom be justified because of the delay which this would impose in determining the future use of the land in question," guidance from the Department of Communities and Local Government states.

CALA’s current challenge will also claim that Pickles did not give enough weight to the existing regional plan, which calls for 612 homes a year in the borough, which isan argument that it used in 2010.

Winchester City Council's Planning and Development Control Committee refused planning permission for the scheme in June 2010. Cala subsequently succeeded in its claim against the Communities Secretary for effectively seeking to abolish regional strategies ahead of statutory regulation.

It was held the Pickles had acted unlawfully in seeking to abolish the strategies in advance of statutory regulation, and could only give “limited weight” to his intention to abolish them in appeal decisions.