Affirmation of Correct Application of NPPF Policies on Rural Housing and Heritage Preservation in City & Country Bramshill Ltd v. Secretary of State for Housing, Communities And Local Government & Ors ([2021] EWCA Civ 320)

Introduction

The case City & Country Bramshill Ltd v. Secretary of State for Housing, Communities And Local Government & Ors ([2021] EWCA Civ 320) was heard by the England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) on March 9, 2021. The appellant, City & Country Bramshill Ltd., sought to challenge the decisions of Waksman J. regarding 33 statutory appeals related to the development at Bramshill Park in Hampshire. The central issues revolved around the interpretation and application of policies in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) concerning the development of "isolated homes in the countryside" and the assessment of harm and benefit to "heritage assets." The respondents included the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Hart District Council, Historic England, and the National Trust, who were objectors to the proposed developments.

Summary of the Judgment

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal brought by City & Country Bramshill Ltd., thereby upholding the original decisions made by Waksman J. The court concluded that the inspector had correctly interpreted and applied the relevant NPPF policies and the duties under the Listed Buildings Act 1990. Specifically, the proposed developments were deemed to result in "isolated homes in the countryside," which was contrary to the NPPF's policies aimed at promoting sustainable development in rural areas. Additionally, the inspector appropriately weighed the harm to heritage assets against any potential public benefits, finding that the proposed developments did not preserve the special qualities of the listed buildings and their settings.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment extensively referenced several key cases that have shaped the interpretation of rural housing policies and heritage asset protection. Notably:

  • Braintree District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2018] EWCA Civ 610: This case clarified the interpretation of "isolated homes in the countryside," emphasizing that the term connotes physical isolation from a settlement rather than isolation from other individual dwellings.
  • R. (on the application of Palmer) v Herefordshire Council [2016] EWCA Civ 1061: Established that decision-makers must give "considerable importance and weight" to preserving the setting of listed buildings, especially those of highest significance.
  • Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Ltd. v East Northamptonshire District Council [2014] EWCA Civ 137: Reinforced the duty under section 66(1) of the Listed Buildings Act to give "considerable importance and weight" to the conservation of heritage assets.
  • Jones v Mordue [2015] EWCA Civ 1243: Affirmed that the balancing of harm and benefits to heritage assets is a matter of planning judgment, not strictly defined by law.
  • Palmer Judgment: Although referenced, the court clarified that the "Palmer principle" does not mandate an internal heritage balance separate from the broader balancing exercise under the NPPF.

Legal Reasoning

The court meticulously analyzed how the inspector applied the relevant policies from the NPPF and statutory duties under the Listed Buildings Act. Key points include:

  • Interpretation of "Isolated Homes in the Countryside": Following the precedent set by Braintree District Council, the court upheld that "isolated homes" refer to physically remote developments from existing settlements, irrespective of proximity to individual dwellings.
  • Sustainability Assessment: The inspector concluded that the proposed developments lacked sustainability due to their isolated location and insufficient alternative transport modes. The court found no legal error in her assessment, especially given the lack of concrete evidence supporting reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Heritage Asset Protection: In line with section 66(1) of the Listed Buildings Act and the NPPF policies, the inspector gave considerable weight to preserving the Jacobean mansion and the registered park and garden. The court confirmed that her balancing of harm and potential benefits was lawful and aligned with established case law.
  • Application of Local Plan Policies: The inspector appropriately applied local plan policies CON11, CON12, CON17, and CON18, giving them significant weight in her assessment. The court found that even though these policies did not explicitly mandate a balancing exercise, they did not conflict with the NPPF or statutory duties.
  • Costs Decision: The inspector's decision to reject the application for costs was upheld as lawful and did not hinge on the merits of the appeals, ensuring that procedural fairness was maintained.

Impact

This judgment reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding the NPPF's policies on sustainable rural development and heritage conservation. It clarifies that:

  • The interpretation of "isolated homes" remains consistent, focusing on physical isolation from settlements rather than from individual dwellings.
  • Sustainable development assessments must be grounded in clear evidence, especially concerning environmental impacts like greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Heritage asset protection under section 66(1) requires considerable weight but allows for balanced judgment considering both harm and potential public benefits.
  • Local plan policies, even if not explicitly balanced, must be given appropriate weight in decision-making processes without conflicting with national policies.

Future planning applications involving rural housing and heritage assets will likely reference this judgment to substantiate the need for compliance with NPPF policies and statutory duties.

Complex Concepts Simplified

"Isolated Homes in the Countryside"

This term refers to residential developments that are physically separate from existing settlements such as villages or towns. The key factor is the remoteness from a defined community, not necessarily from other individual houses.

Sustainability under the NPPF

Sustainability in this context pertains to the location and design of housing developments to ensure they support vibrant rural communities, reduce reliance on private transport, and integrate with necessary infrastructure and services. Sustainable development avoids creating housing isolated from these elements.

Section 66(1) of the Listed Buildings Act 1990

This statutory duty requires decision-makers to give special regard to preserving the desirability of listed buildings, their settings, and any features of special architectural or historic interest when considering planning permissions.

Balanced Evaluation of Heritage Assets

When a development proposal affects heritage assets, the decision-maker must weigh any harm to the asset's significance against the public benefits of the development. "Substantial harm" requires clear justification if outweighed by "substantial public benefits," while "less than substantial harm" is balanced against overall public benefits.

Conclusion

The City & Country Bramshill Ltd v. Secretary of State for Housing judgment serves as a pivotal affirmation of the correct application of the National Planning Policy Framework concerning rural housing and heritage asset protection. By upholding the inspector's decisions, the Court of Appeal emphasizes the necessity for sustainable development practices that integrate seamlessly with existing communities and preserve significant historical assets. The clear interpretation of "isolated homes," steadfast adherence to sustainability assessments, and robust protection of heritage assets set a definitive precedent for future planning applications. This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring that national policies are faithfully implemented, thereby fostering development that is both environmentally sustainable and culturally respectful.