28 Sep 2024
Community campaigners presented their case opposing plans to build 95 houses on Green Belt land in Park Street at a five day planning inquiry which ended recently.
Appellant Scott Properties employed two barristers, an experienced planning company and a range of consultant companies, including Atkins, to argue why it should be allowed to build on land opposite the BP garage in the village.
The inquiry was notable because St Albans district council, having rejected the original planning application, changed its mind and offered no evidence in support of the decision.
Instead, local campaign group Greenbelt, who had been fighting the proposal for two and a half years, successfully applied to be appointed as a Rule 6 Party, which is a formal party in the proceedings.
With the withdrawal of SADC, they were therefore the only party opposing the development at the appeal, a very unusual situation which is rarely seen either in St Albans or elsewhere.
The Rule 6 Party was a team effort with a number of local political representatives and two experienced campaigners, all supported by the local Park Street community.
Paul King, who led the campaign said: “This was quite a remarkable event with the council insisting that it supported the development, despite having rejected it. Most normal people might find this position to be bizarre, and they would be right.
“The reason for them changing their mind is not known, because the planning meeting where they reversed their decision was held in secret.
“There was a very public battle at the two planning meetings, between planning officers and elected councillors nominated to be on the planning committee. The webcasts of these meetings were removed from the council website after six months and the council made every effort possible to avoid these being seen again at the appeal. Their behaviour has been atrocious.
“As a consequence, the appellant has issued a claim for full costs of the appeal against the council. So if the cost of the appeal was the motivation for not contesting it, this rationale may look pretty silly.
“On the other hand, if we win the appeal, their decision to surrender the land for development may look pretty silly. So in either case their behaviour needs to be investigated.”
Greenbelt’s team at the inquiry consisted of two district councillors, Nuala Webb and Terrie Smith (both appearing in a private capacity), St Stephen’s Parish Council chair David Yates, Shirani St Ledger McCarthy, who heads the campaign group Keep Chiswell Green and Paul King from Greenbelt.
Nuala said: “The land in question is the only open land separating Park Street from St Albans, so it is critical that it is retained as farmland.
“For many, this position is easy to understand, however throughout the appeal, the developer was persistent in claiming that the land did not serve Green Belt purposes. Probably in November we will find out what the Inspector’s opinion is.
“The over-arching issue is that the council has been unable to identify sufficient land for housing in the past, as well as today. Therefore speculators submit proposals on Green Belt land, throwing substantial amounts of money at their efforts, in the knowledge that success will generate tens of millions of pounds of profit.”
The next stage of the Local Plan process was launched this week, and this land is one of the sites identified within it to be released from the Green Belt. So even if this appeal is refused, campaigners could find that it is developed as a result of the Local Plan process.
Paul said: “It appears that we are under attack from all directions. The planning department at the council have gone to extraordinary efforts to have this land released for housing,
and it is hard to understand why, since it will only accommodate about 100 houses out of a district-wide requirement of 15,000.
“In the public consultation on the Local Plan, more people objected to the inclusion of this land than any other piece of land in the Plan, representing 11.4 per cent of all responses.
“The council appears to have ignored these comments and have included it in the next stage of the process. This again raises the question of why they are so determined to build on this particular land. It also makes clear that the consultation was a farce.
“There has been very little scrutiny of the Plan so far, and they have now decided to embark on a mad rush to have a draft Plan in front of the Inspectorate before the Government’s new NPPF takes effect. This will provide an excuse to avoid the inconvenience of properly considering feedback from the public.”
On the first morning the public had an opportunity to speak, and all raised concerns about the proposal. These speakers were amongst the 300-plus objectors to the original application.
Terrie said: “It is obvious that local people do not want this scheme to proceed, yet planning officers are continuing to support it and the developer threw everything at the appeal, including employing one of the top planning barristers in the country.
“Our case was presented in a very detailed and professional fashion. Everybody involved, including the Inspector, appeared surprised how a stand-alone Rule 6 Party could deliver such a comprehensive case
“Paul did an amazing job of acting as the advocate for Greenbelt. On the Friday morning, his cross-examination of the developer’s Highways witness in particular was very well conducted and made her evidence look very weak. Overall, he gave the other barristers a good run for their money.”
After the appeal, Shirani added: “With each appeal in the district, we – as campaign groups – are learning more and more. United we can achieve more than any of us could imagine alone.
“Now is the time – we must join forces and act together to support our residents and protect our Green Belt for our own generation and for generations to come.”
The full webcasts of each session at the inquiry can be seen on the SADC website. The easiest way to find these is to Google “St Albans webcast library” and select those labelled “Park Street Inquiry”.
