Neighbourhood development plans (NDPs) – hundreds of which have been created countrywide since the Localism Act 2011 became law – give local communities a powerful say in the future development of their areas. As one High Court case showed, however, they are not universally popular with house builders.
The case concerned the inter-relationship between NDPs and the requirement of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) that a tilted balance should be applied in favour of sustainable housing developments in areas where local authorities cannot show that they have a five-year supply of available housing land.
Communities that had adopted NDPs were concerned that restrictions on the volume and location of housing developments contained within them were being given less weight by planning inspectors as a result of being deemed to be out of date due to the local authority not having a five-year supply. Communities were in the circumstances anxious that they would find themselves in difficulties in resisting windfall housing applications on unfavoured sites.
In response to those concerns, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government issued a written ministerial statement in December 2016 and associated changes were also subsequently made to the National Planning Practice Guidance.
The written statement confirmed that, where a planning application conflicts with an NDP, permission should not normally be granted and that, in certain circumstances, NDPs should not be deemed to be out of date, even in the absence of a five-year supply. The policy shift applied to NDPs that allocated sites for housing and where the local authority could demonstrate a three-year supply of housing land.
Twenty-five house builders joined forces to mount a judicial review challenge to the written statement, claiming, amongst other things, that the Secretary of State’s approach was irrational and threatened to undermine the objective of the NPPF to promote construction of more new homes across the country.
In dismissing their case, however, the High Court found that the terms of the written statement were sufficiently clear and that the Secretary of State was entitled to conclude that extensive research indicated that NDPs generally help to boost housing supply. The Court also rejected arguments that the Government had given an unequivocal assurance that a written ministerial statement in relation to national housing policy would not be issued without prior consultation with the house building industry.