Council accuses Levelling Up Secretary of undermining local democratic planning process, makes statutory review bid

Reading Borough Council has applied for a statutory review of the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities' decision to grant planning permission to a 600-home development scheme.

The council vowed to fight the decision, claiming the Secretary of State had ridden "roughshod over" and undermined the local democratic planning process. 

The dispute centres on an application to build a large mixed-use development near the town's central train station, comprising homes, office space, and commercial properties. 

The developers behind the scheme had appealed against Reading's non-determination of their application in 2022. 

In March 2022, the appeal was then recovered for the Secretary of State's determination.

A planning inspector consequently produced a report for the Secretary of State, which recommended the appeal be dismissed and permission for the development refused. 

The inspector found that the balance between harm to heritage assets and the public benefits of the development "weighs against the scheme".

They also concluded that the building would impact neighbouring buildings' sunlight, causing "significant harm".

However, the Secretary of State disagreed with the inspector and approved the application.

In a notice explaining the decision on behalf of the Secretary of State, the Minister of State for Housing, Planning and Building Safety, Lee Rowley MP, said: "Weighing in favour of the proposal is the benefit of reusing brownfield land which carries substantial weight; the provision of housing, the economic benefits and the provision of the north/south link which each attract significant weight."

Considering the points weighing against the development, the minister said the impact of the new development on daylight/sunlight for current and future residents carried moderate weight, while sustainability and climate change issues each carried moderate weight.

He acknowledged that the 'less than substantial' harm to designated heritage assets carried great weight. 

However, the minister said that, taking into account the public benefits of the proposal, "the Secretary of State disagrees with the Inspector […] that the benefits of the appeal scheme are not collectively sufficient to outbalance the identified 'less than substantial' harm to the significance of the Grade II Listed Station Building, the Grade II* Town Council Chamber, and the Market Place and London Street Conservation Area". 

The letter concluded: "He considers that the balancing exercise under paragraph 208 of the Framework is therefore favourable to the proposal."

News of Reading's challenge to the decision came on Tuesday (7 May), when it announced it had applied to the High Court to bring a statutory review under section 288 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

The local authority's lead councillor for planning, Cllr Micky Leng, said: "The council firmly stands by its initial reasons for refusal and, after taking legal advice, we believe we have a strong case to challenge the decision at the High Court.

"The Secretary of State concluded the reuse of the brownfield site in the town centre location outweighs the harms identified by the Inspector, and by local representatives before that. 

"As previously stated, the decision brings into question the value of any local authority having adopted policies and reaching planning decisions, or indeed holding detailed Planning Inquiries when decisions are appealed, if outcomes can be so readily overturned."

He added: "We will not allow the Secretary of State to ride roughshod over and undermine the local democratic planning process."

A spokesperson for the DLUHC said it would be inappropriate to comment on the potential litigation.

Adam Carey