Case 3323363

46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN9 6ER

North Northamptonshire — appeal dismissed

Outcome
Dismissed
Decision date
5 July 2024
Authority
North Northamptonshire
Inspector
Gee R
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Other
Development type
Other minor developments
Appellant
Tophaven Homes Ltd
LPA reference
NE/23/00040/VAR
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
15 January 2024

Summary AI

The costs application made by Tophaven Sustainable Construction Limited was dismissed as the Inspector found no unreasonable behaviour by the Council. The appeal was against the failure of the Council to issue a notice of their decision within the prescribed period. The Inspector agreed with the Council Members' decision to refuse the variation of condition, finding sufficient grounds for refusal.

Generated from the decision letter — check against the original before relying on it.

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 Costs Decision

46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN9 6ER — North Northamptonshire — Costs Decision Site visit made on 28 May 2024 by R Gee BA (Hons) Dip TP PGCert UD MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 5th July 2024 Costs application in relation to Appeal Ref: APP/M2840/W/23/3323363 46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, Northamptonshire NN9 6ER • The application is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sections 78, 322 and Schedule 6, and the Local Government Act 1972, section 250(5). • The application is made by Tophaven Sustainable Construction Limited for a full award of costs against North Northamptonshire Council.

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Costs Decision

46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN9 6ER — North Northamptonshire — Costs Decision Site visit made on 28 May 2024 by R Gee BA (Hons) Dip TP PGCert UD MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 5th July 2024 Costs application in relation to Appeal Ref: APP/M2840/W/23/3323363 46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, Northamptonshire NN9 6ER • The application is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sections 78, 322 and Schedule 6, and the Local Government Act 1972, section 250(5). • The application is made by Tophaven Sustainable Construction Limited for a full award of costs against North Northamptonshire Council.

Page 1 · Chunk 2 Costs Decision

46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN9 6ER — North Northamptonshire — Costs Decision • The appeal was against the failure of the Council to issue a notice of their decision within the prescribed period on an application for variation of condition 11 to allow for retention of porous driveway with gravel topping instead of the approved hard surface driveway pursuant to application 18/01510/OUT Outline: Demolition of existing building and residential development consisting of 5No 4-bedroom dwellings with amended access, associated parking and amenity space (all matters reserved except access); and to reflect the changes proposed to the site plan approved under condition 1 pursuant to 20/00346/REM - Reserved matters for Appearance, Landscaping, Layout, Scale, pursuant to Outline Planning Permission 18/01510/OUT. Decision 1. The application for an award of costs is refused. Reasons 2. Parties in planning appeals normally meet their own expenses. However, the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) advises that costs may be awarded against a party who has behaved unreasonably and thereby caused the party applying for costs to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process. 3.

Page 1 · Chunk 3 Costs Decision

46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN9 6ER — North Northamptonshire — Costs Decision The application relies on the fact that the Council Officers recommended that the approval of the proposal, but that the Council Members took a different course of action without adequate reason to do so. 4. The PPG indicates that local planning authorities will be at risk of an award being made against them if they fail to produce evidence to substantiate a reason for refusal. 5. In this case I have noted the recommendation of the Council Officers. However, the decision is one which is a matter of judgement. The Council Members in this case were entitled not to accept the professional advice of Members and consultees so long as a case could be made for the contrary view. 6. It will be seen from my decision that I agree with Council Members and that there were sufficient grounds for refusing the variation of condition related to accessibility alone. It follows that I am satisfied that the Council has shown that it was able to substantiate its reason for refusal. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 2 · Chunk 4 Costs Decision

46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN9 6ER — North Northamptonshire — Costs Decision Costs Decision APP/M2840/W/23/3323363 7. On procedural grounds the Applicant’s claim is that the Council acted unreasonably in not determining the application within the statutory time frame. From the evidence before me the application was considered by the Planning Committee, with a decision in principle, in a timely manner. However, following the resolution to refuse there was a delay in issuing the Decision. Despite the Council’s request for an extension of time the appeal was lodged, and accordingly the Council could not issue the Decision. Although there was a delay following the resolution to refuse permission that was frustrating for the applicant, even if the decision was issued earlier this would not have avoided the need for the appeal. I therefore find no unreasonable behaviour on procedural grounds. 8. There is little substantive evidence before me regarding claims that Members failed to declare interests. In any event, this not within the jurisdiction of my decision. 9. For the reasons stated above I cannot agree that the Council has acted unreasonably in this case and that the Applicant was not put to unnecessary or wasted expense. 10.

Page 2 · Chunk 5 Costs Decision

46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN9 6ER — North Northamptonshire — Costs Decision I therefore find that unreasonable behaviour, as described in the PPG, has not occurred and an award of costs is not warranted.

Page 2 · Chunk 6 R Gee

46 Cartrill Street, Raunds, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN9 6ER — North Northamptonshire — R Gee INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Extracted from the decision letter PDF and shown in full, chunk by chunk.

Main issues and findings

Planning obligations
Against appellant
¶2

The Council was entitled to accept or reject the professional advice of Members and consultees, and their decision was not unreasonable.

Planning obligations
Against appellant
¶7

Although there was a delay in issuing the decision, it would not have avoided the need for the appeal, and the Council's behaviour was not unreasonable.

Planning obligations
Against appellant
¶8

There was little substantive evidence regarding claims that Members failed to declare interests, and this was not within the jurisdiction of the decision.

Planning obligations
Against appellant
¶9

The Inspector found that the Council's behaviour was not unreasonable, and therefore an award of costs was not warranted.

Site constraints from the Casework Database

Conservation area
Green belt
Listed building setting
AONB
SSSI
Flooding an issue

Source

Decision letter, 2 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 5 July 2024 under the Open Government Licence.