Letter: Stamford West development: Why I am appealing against judge’s ruling

0
Have your say

I noted the piece in last week’s Mercury about my efforts to have quashed the South Kesteven District Council planning consent for Stamford West.

I have appealed the decisions of the learned judge.

My four grounds of appeal are:

1 The learned judge erred in law in failing to find it arguable that the council acted irrationally in determining the planning application by relying upon the inclusion of the land in the Submission Site Allocation and Policies DPD (SAP) at the same time as the council had accepted that its site selection process for the SAP needed review and retesting

2 The learned judge erred in law and fact in failing to find it arguable that the council, contrary to Core Strategy Policy SP1, failed to consider whether there was sufficient land within the built-up area of the town to meet Stamford’s needs and whether there were more sustainable sites

3 The learned judge erred in law and fact in failing to find it arguable that the council’s failure to make available housing land supply figures (either to councillors of the committee which made the decision being challenged or to members of the public who are entitled to comment on that information) prior to the making of the decision subject of the challenge was irrational and unfair and a failure to have regard to material considerations 4 The learned judge erred in law in failing to find it arguable that the council failed to consider the availability of alternative sites, whether brownfield or

greenfield, contrary to the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011.

I await events.

EGERTON GILMAN

Uffington Road, Stamford