By Carole Dennett
UPDATED
Planning permission granted by the IW Council for a major housing development has been ruled unlawful by the Court of Appeal after a two-day hearing last week.
The decision marks a victory for campaigners – but it’s possible that celebrations may be short-lived.
The proposed development at West Acre Park included plans for 473 homes, a café, doctor’s surgery, and supporting infrastructure. However, the council’s failure to publish a key planning document was deemed to be a breach of its legal obligations.
The case revolved around the council’s failure to publish the section 106 planning agreement, which outlines contributions developers must make for community improvements. The issue was raised by Greenfields (IOW) Limited, who claimed the IW Council had not complied with the correct procedures. The Court of Appeal agreed with them and ruled that the omission prevented public scrutiny and denied residents the chance to comment on important contributions for roadworks. The legal challenge had been funded by public donations to a crowdfunder appeal.
Lord Justice Lewis determined that merely mentioning the Section 106 contribution’s existence in council reports was not enough for the IW Council to comply with their obligations. Without the published details, it was impossible for the public to verify whether the contribution was enough to fund the necessary infrastructure.
While the council argued the challenge had been brought too late, the Court confirmed their claim was submitted within the legal timeframe. Three further challenges, concerning committee procedures, a councillor being excluded from taking part in the decision and alleged bias, were rejected.
Cllr Geoff Brodie, who was accused of bias and who, as chairman of the planning committee decided that Cllr Matthew Price could not take part in a meeting after he left a site visit early said he was delighted with the decision and pointed out the decision had not yet been quashed, and nobody should jump to conclusions. He said his decision in relation to Cllr Price was in line with the council’s Code of Practice and that the allegation in relation to bias was false. He added: “No doubt an apology won’t be forthcoming from those who made this allegation”.
The Court of Appeal has invited further submissions before making any final decisions in relation to the planning appeal.
The words of a spokesman for developer Captiva Homes also seemed to warn against premature celebration by the campaigners. He said: “We are reassured that the preliminary judgment does not relate to the merits of the housing scheme itself but instead concerns a legal procedural point on a technical matter – one we hope the IW Council is well placed to resolve quickly.
“We remain committed to working with the Council to ensure that much-needed housing for Island residents at West Acre Park can move forward with minimal delay.”
Cllr Michael Lilley, a leading light in the campaign to oppose the West Acre Park development described it as a David and Goliath fight. He said: “I have supported my residents who solidly believed there were flaws in the process and were courageous in challenging IW Council
“The system is stacked heavily in favour of those who can pay for legal teams easily. It costs huge amounts of money to seek judicial review and justice but my residents showed it was possible through crowdfunding with over 500 of them contributing.
“The sadness is that residents had to pay to prove IW Council had acted unlawfully. It is a historic victory for ordinary people who just want fairness and transparency. They and I believed and believe that this proposed development did not and does not have the road infrastructure to sustain it and that this important nature corridor is not suitable for housing.”
The Isle of Wight Council has been approached for comment.
