Luton Borough Council, R (on the application of) v Central Bedfordshire Council & Ors
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE HOLGATE
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Central Bedfordshire Council granted planning permission for a large urban extension on Green Belt land. Luton Borough Council challenged the decision, arguing it lacked an acceptable minimum level of affordable housing. The court held that CBC was under a duty to determine the application and gave permissible weight to the emerging Development Strategy. It also found no obligation for CBC to assess alternative sites and ruled that failure to disclose viability information did not constitute procedural unfairness. The court dismissed LBC's claim for judicial review.
Judgment
Mr Justice Holgate:
On 2 June 2014 Central Bedfordshire Council (“CBC”) granted planning permission to the Houghton Regis Development Consortium, the First Interested Party for a substantial urban extension on 262 hectares of Green Belt land on the Houghton Regis North Site 1 (“HRN1”). The second to fifth interested parties are members of the consortium. In this judgment I will refer to the interested parties collectively as the “IP”.
The permission was granted in outline, with details of access, appearance, landscape, layout and scale reserved for subsequent approval. The outline consent authorises a large scale development which includes up to 5,150 dwellings and up to 202,500 sq m gross of development in the classes A1 to A3 (retail), A4 (public house), A5 (take away), B1, B2, B8 (offices, industrial and storage and distribution), C1 (Hotel), C2 (care home), D1 and D2 (community and leisure) and other uses. According to the schedule of development parameters, the scheme includes (in addition to 25,000 sq m of B2 and 125,000 sq m of B8) up to:-
5000 sq m of B1 offices
10,000 sq m for a main food store, 2,500 sq m of food retail, 12,500 sq m of comparison retail and 5,000 sq m of A2 to A5 uses
A hotel of 3,000 sq m
40,000 sq m of D1 (non-residential institutions)
5,000 sq m of D2 space (including a cinema of up to 3,000 sq m)
The planning permission was accompanied by a section 106 obligation also dated 2 June 2014. Clause 5 and the fourth and ninth schedules imposed an obligation on those interested in the development site to provide a minimum of 10% of the total number of dwellings as “affordable housing dwellings”. But it is common ground that the obligation may require up to 30% of the total number of dwellings to be provided as affordable units, pursuant to a review mechanism based upon the sales figures actually achieved.
On 10 July 2014 Luton Borough Council (“LBC”), an adjoining local planning authority, filed a claim for judicial review. Singh J ordered that the application for permission be adjourned to an oral hearing. On 9 September 2014 Supperstone J gave directions for the application to be dealt with at a rolled up hearing, which took place before me on 2 to 4 December 2014.
CBC’s decision is of great importance to LBC. The Luton/Dunstable/Houghton Regis “conurbation” has been surrounded by a tight Green Belt boundary since 1980, which has constrained peripheral expansion. LBC is unable to find land within its own admini