The proposed development includes plans for 890 new homes, employment space, a primary school and an extension to the local hospital. Plans also include new open space and associated infrastructure.
The Secretary of State agreed with the Planning Inspector and allowed the appeal (99-page/826KB PDF) by Swindon Gateway Partnership.
In his decision letter, the Secretary of State found that the development would be in conformity with the development plan, including the principle of development on the site.
The Secretary of State concluded that the scheme should not be refused on the grounds of prematurity because the Council has supported development in the area since 2003 and that "to refuse the scheme on the grounds that it is premature has to be seen in the context of the Council's own views on the acceptability of the site".
Planning permission can be refused on the grounds of prematurity if granting that permission would prejudice a development plan which is being prepared and is not yet in force by predetermining decisions about the scale, location or phasing of new development.
"The principle of development has a long pedigree of active support by Swindon Borough Council, having been allocated for development since 2003 and being included as Policy NC3 in the emerging Core Strategy," the decision letter said.
"[The Secretary of State] is also satisfied that it would not be premature to decide this case ahead of the examination of the Core Strategy," the decision letter concluded.
The need for housing land in Swindon was also a matter that Secretary of State considered to be important to the decision to allow the appeal, and he found the "undeniable need for the release of deliverable housing land in Swindon, leant further weight to the proposal".
“The Swindon scheme is similar to many of its predecessors in the growing line of prematurity appeals, with the under-supply of deliverable housing land at the local level and the need for economic growth at the national level counting in its favour," said Marcus Bate, a planning and development expert at Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com.
"A peculiar feature, which partially accounts for the Secretary of State’s favourable decision, is the positive policy context for the site in terms of saved development plan policies. But what is most notable is the concern about the delays which could arise from awaiting the outcome of the Core Strategy process - not anticipated until the end of 2012 at the earliest," said Bate.
"Many will feel that a period of less than 12 months is far from lengthy in plan-making terms, although developers should note the position when arguing in favour of timely development-control decisions on contentious schemes,” he said.
In allowing the appeal, the Secretary of State found that the proposal accords with the development plan and that there are no material considerations of sufficient weight which would justify refusing planning permission.
This decision is in contrast to another recent Secretary of State decision, in which Pickles refused an appeal for a 1,200 home mixed-use development in Newmarket on the grounds that it would be premature.
"It would be premature to permit this strategic scheme on a site which may or may not be chosen when properly evaluated through the democratic development plan process," the decision letter said.
Bate's view is that "developers will be forgiven for concluding that predicting the outcome of prematurity challenges on appeal (or indeed in the High Court) is more of a dark art than a legal science," he said.
"Three days separate the Secretary of State’s decisions on the Newmarket and Swindon appeals, yet the conclusions reached on prematurity are polar opposites, with the issue being determinative for the refusal of the former and being swept aside for the approval of the latter,” he said.
