Decision to refuse 67 Hastings homes between Harrow Lane and The Ridge has cost taxpayers £40,000

As previously reported, a planning inspector approved plans last month to build 67 houses on land between Harrow Lane and The Ridge, after overturning a council refusal of the scheme.

The application had been before the council’s planning committee at a meeting in April last year, during which councillors refused permission against officer advice.

The results of the appeal were discussed at a meeting of the council’s planning committee on Wednesday (November 23), with planning services manager Eleanor Evans revealing that the council had been ordered to pay £40,000 to developer Park Lane Homes.

This was because the inspector said the council had acted ‘unreasonably’ in reaching its reasons for refusal, as they had not formed part of the discussion until councillors — unhappy that the proposed number of homes exceeded the amount set out in a previous outline application — had already suggested turning down the scheme.

Ms Evans said: “My advice to councillors is that it should be recognised that, in this particular instance, the inspector both considered our decision was wrong and also unreasonable.

“I think it is just an important one to note going forward when we have similar applications.”

Some committee members took issue with this advice, however, taking the opportunity to criticise the inspector’s decision.

They included Cllr Mike Edwards (Con), who said: “My personal view on seeing the result of this appeal was this was a completely obtuse outcome.

“I wasn’t on the committee at the time. It would seem to me the point was that the applicant had increased the volume of houses on the site substantially. Something around about 25 per cent from the original outline plan.

“That is a huge increase and to go from an outline of a given figure then increase it by 25 per cent for the detailed application seems to be quite wrong. For the inspector to agree with that sets a terrible precedent across the country, not just in Hastings.

“I wonder if there is any way we can appeal against the appeal, a judicial review or something like that?”

In response, Ms Evans said there would not be a route to do so and stressed that the reason for bringing the appeal to the committee’s attention was to highlight reasons for the inspector’s ‘unreasonable’ finding.

Ms Evans also pointed out that the appeal scheme was a full application, as opposed to a reserved matters application. This meant the numbers set out in the outline application did

She said: “The reason I want to raise this is that the points you are making have been tested and are wrong. The planning officers advised you against this — not you particularly, but the committee at the time — and that decision has been tested.”

She added: “If you are refusing an application you have to be able to explain what the harm is and that didn’t happen at that committee.

“I know there are some councillors here round the table who disagree, but I do sincerely hope that councillors hear what I am saying, because this is a cost to the council and the council tax payers.”