14 October 2011 - St Albans City & District Council

a move away from this level of local protection in national policy terms. This change would serve
to diminish the case for Strategic Gaps and further undermine the appellant’s approach to double
counting the impacts on Green Belt and Strategic Gap policies.
4.11 Since the publication of the Draft NPPF the Government has made a number of statements about
the way in which the Draft NPPF is to be interpreted (WH5). These indicate that there is no
presumption in favour of development per se, the presumption is in favour of sustainable
development taking into account other Draft NPPF policies. The proposal at Radlett would not be
classed as sustainable development given its failings in rail terms.
4.12 On 4 September 2011 the Secretary of State confirmed that “the idea that the presumption in
favour means that growth will be able to take place wherever, whenever and however is false” and
on 14 September he wrote “if it isn’t sustainable, it must not, and will not happen”. Similarly the
Prime Minister in a letter to the National Trust of 20 September said he recognised the need to
balance environmental, economic and social dimensions (copy appended emphasis added).
Planning Policy Statement 4 – Economic Growth
4.13 This PPS was published on 29 December 2009 and as Government policy attracts substantial
weight.
Policy EC6.1 says:
Local planning authorities should ensure that the countryside is protected for the sake for its
intrinsic character and beauty, the diversity of its landscapes, heritage and wildlife, the wealth of
its natural resources and to ensure it may be enjoyed by all.
Policy EC6.2 says:
In rural areas, local planning authorities should:
a. strictly control economic development in open countryside away from existing settlements, or
outside areas allocated for development in development plans.
So in relation to the countryside the Government has recently restated its determination to protect
the countryside from development
5. Other Matters.
5.1 On 8 September 2011 Slough Borough Council refused an application by Goodmans Logistics Ltd
for a rail freight interchange at Colnbrook near Slough. (Copy decision appended WH6). The
refusal is in itself not a significant material change in circumstances but the application is.
5.2 None of the reasons for refusal state that the proposal is incapable of operating as a SRFI. The
reasons for refusal refer to matters which are matters of judgment for the decision maker and
hence are capable of being overturned and permission granted on appeal as a result of how the
application has been determined Furthermore, the conditions offered by the applicants would
make the SRFI rail connected to a better gauge cleared route from its opening, and the size of the
scheme, and hence its impact, would be less than Radlett.
6. Conclusion
6.1 There has been no diminution of the importance accorded to Green Belt policy but there has been
a weakening of emphasis to be placed on Strategic Gap policies.