Blackpool Borough Council, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor

Judgment

MR JUSTICE KERR:

This case is about the future use of a synagogue in Blackpool, which is not being used for Jewish worship at present. It is a heritage asset, of historic and architectural significance. The claimant (the council) applies under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 , and under section 63 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 for an order quashing the decision of an inspector appointed by the defendant (the Secretary of State) to permit development of the site which the council considers detrimental.

The United Hebrew Synagogue in Leamington Road, Blackpool was built in 1916-1926. Its design and features are of considerable historic and architectural interest. It was extended in the 1950s and 1970s to accommodate more worshippers and add a kitchen, meeting rooms and classrooms. In 1998 it was “Grade II” listed and it is on the Heritage at Risk Register kept by Historic England (formerly known as English Heritage). It is not used for Jewish worship at the moment, though it could be taken up by a new congregation in future.

The synagogue was sold in 2011 or 2012, and deconsecrated on 13 May 2012. The second defendant (the developer), submitted applications for planning permission and listed building consent in September 2012. In the applications, the developer sought planning permission and listed building consent to modify the building and add five self-contained two bedroom flats at the back of it. The first set of applications was withdrawn before going before the council’s planning committee.

In September 2013, the council obtained a report from a conservation and planning management agent, which recognised the national and in some respects international significance of the synagogue as a heritage asset, as well as its religious significance. The greatest threat to the building was recognised by the developers’ agents (in a draft report, revised in December 2013) as redundancy, disuse and consequent loss of public access. It was agreed by all concerned that a strategy to conserve it required it to be returned to use, whether religious or secular.

Further identical applications were made by the developer in November 2013. Historic England (as I shall call it, though it had not yet changed its name) were consulted and wrote a letter of 11 December 2013, expressing concern at lack of integration of the synagogue with the residential part of the site; that the development would mean r