Richard Pigott Planning & Design Archives

Biodiversity Net Gain looming large for developments of all sizes

23rd August 2023 by Gary Stringer

The date on which biodiversity net gain (BNG) comes into law is fast approaching. Here, our Director Richard Pigott, provides answers to some FAQs about the whole process and what it will mean for applicants, landowners and homeowners.

What exactly is biodiversity net gain (BNG)?

Biodiversity net gain (BNG) is an approach to development, and/or land management, that aims to leave the natural environment in a measurably better state than it was beforehand. The minimum gain required will be 10% over and above the existing condition of the site. This habitat gain will need to be secured for at least 30 years via planning obligations or conservation covenants. BNG was stipulated in the Environment Act (2021) and the 2 year implementation period is drawing to an end.

When will BNG actually take effect?

BNG is set to become law in November 2023 with a transition period for small sites extended to April 2024. Small sites are defined as:

(i) For residential: 1-9 dwellings on a site having an area of less than one hectare, or where the number of dwellings to be provided is not known, a site area of less than 0.5 hectares.

(ii) For non-residential: where the floor space to be created is less than 1,000 square metres or where the site area is less than one hectare.

All applications submitted after these dates (the exact dates in November and April are yet to be confirmed) will need to meet the new requirements.

What are the current laws/requirements for BNG?

At present there are no laws covering BNG so it is applied inconsistently across different local authorities. Many now require some level of BNG (often as little as 0.1%) but will all change in November.

How is BNG calculated?

In simple terms, BNG is calculated by working out the baseline value of a site in habitat terms then working out the overall impact of a development using the Biodiversity Metric. This metric is designed to provide ecologists, developers, planners and other interested parties with a means of assessing changes in biodiversity value (losses or gains) brought about by development or changes in land management.

Are local planning authorities ready for the new system?

Almost certainly not. Local planning authorities and wildlife trusts are already stretched and the new system can only add more pressure to their workloads in the short term at the very least.

What if BNG cant be achieved on site?

There is a preference for onsite or local enhancements. However, in many cases it will not be possible to achieve biodiversity net gain on a development site or on adjacent land within the applicant’s ownership or control. In such circumstances, the developer can secure the unit shortfall by securing a bespoke site for net gain, or from appropriate sites on the local net gain habitat market from other landowners. These sites will need to meet the criteria of the biodiversity gain sites register when available. If a shortfall in units required to achieve BNG remains, having explored the onsite and local offsite options, a developer can purchase statutory biodiversity credits from government as a last resort.

What will off site BNG cost and will this impact viability?

At present it is very hard to predict what the cost of off-site BNG will be as there remain uncertainties about how the system will work. The Land Trust has previously suggested that BNG units could be worth around £10,000-£25,000 each, although local demand and supply are likely to be what ultimately sets unit prices. What can be said with certainty though is that BNG could be a very significant factor affecting the viability of some schemes, both large and small.

Comment

Whilst mandatory BNG is hardly an overnight concept, it certainly seems to have gone under the radar for many of our clients and eyebrows are often raised when we tell them what it could mean for their proposals. Some clients are determined to submit applications before November but this is not always possible for a variety of reasons. If you wish to discuss this issue further please do not hesitate to get in touch on 01332 347371 or email enquiries@planningdesign.co.uk.

Richard Pigott, Director – Chartered Town Planner, Planning & Design Practice Ltd

Onshore wind given a new lease of life?

14th December 2022 by Gary Stringer

The government has committed to a technical consultation seeking views on how local authorities can demonstrate local support when considering onshore wind development in England.

The current position as set out at paragraph 158 of the NPPF is that “a proposed wind energy development involving one or more turbines should not be considered acceptable unless it is in an area identified as suitable for wind energy development in the development plan; and, following consultation, it can be demonstrated that the planning impacts identified by the affected local community have been fully addressed and the proposal has their backing.” This has effectively resulted in a ban on onshore wind introduced by David Cameron in the early years of the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition.

Pledging the consultation, the government explained that local authorities would need to demonstrate their support for certain areas as being suitable for onshore wind, rather than the “rigid requirements” for sites to be designated in local plans.

The proposal also commits to maintaining protections for landscapes such as national parks, areas of outstanding natural beauty and the green belt.

Views will also be sought on how the planning system can support communities to have a say on the necessary infrastructure to connect wind farms to the grid and encourage the upgrading of existing wind farm sites.

The government said it will launch the consultation by Christmas and it will conclude by the end of April 2023.

In other climate news, Levelling-up secretary Michael Gove has granted permission to the UK’s first new coal mine in 30 years near Whitehaven, Cumbria, after finding that its environmental harms could be justified by the coal it would provide for the steel industry in the UK and Europe.

Richard Pigott, Chartered Town Planner and Director at Planning & Design Practice said – “it remains unclear how hard it will be to demonstrate community support for an onshore wind project but this has to be a step in the right direction in the country’s drive to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050. At the same time, the government’s decision to allow the UK’s first new coal mine in 30 years near Whitehaven, Cumbria is somewhat puzzling to say the least.”

Greenpeace’s policy director Doug Parr said the UK risked being guilty of “climate hypocrisy” and Hugh Ellis of the Town and Country Planning Association described the move as a “shocking dereliction of duty”. Conservative MP Alok Sharma, former Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and president of COP26, described it as a “backwards step”.

Enforcement matters….

22nd November 202227th October 2022 by Gary Stringer

Discharge of Planning Conditions HIgh Peak

The enforcement of planning control is often shrouded in mystery. Here, in the first of 2 parts, our Director Richard Pigott, sets out some of the key components of the system and passes on the benefits of his experience in the public and private sectors.

It is first worth clarifying that the carrying out of ‘development’ (i.e. building works, material changes of use or engineering operations) without the benefit of planning permission is not, initially at least, ‘illegal’ but is better described as ‘unauthorised’. ‘Breaches of planning control’ are normally anonymously flagged by the general public to the local planning authority (LPA). In other words, the system is reactive – rarely do LPA’s proactively monitor compliance with planning consents. I say rarely because there was some proactive monitoring of planning permissions at Macclesfield Borough Council (later to become part of Cheshire East Council) where I started my planning career but this ceased a long time ago and I am not aware of any authorities which do it now due to budgetary constraints.

Once a ‘breach of planning control’ has been identified the local planning authority (LPA) will often invite a landowner to submit a planning application to ‘regularise the breach’ – in other words to retrospectively obtain planning permission for development. In these circumstances, the LPA must assess the application in the same way as if it were a proposed development and not let the fact that it is a retrospective application affect the outcome either way. In my experience, whilst officers are usually adept at making this assessment, councillors sometimes find it harder to put this to the backs of their minds and the phrase “we don’t like retrospective applications” is often heard in council chambers.

If the application is approved, that is generally the end of the matter, with consent issued subject to any relevant conditions minus, of course, the usual 3 year commencement time frame. If the application is refused, however, the landowner then has the option to appeal the decision or rectify the breach of planning control (i.e. to correct the unauthorised works or cease the unauthorised use). If neither of the above happens, the LPA must decide whether it is ‘expedient’ to take enforcement action. The question of expediency, and the options that are open to both the LPA and the landowner moving forward, will be discussed in next month’s follow up article.

We are always willing to provide help and advice, and are able to provide an initial consultation without charge. For more information on our services and our team, please contact us on 01332 347371 or email enquiries@planningdesign.co.uk.

Not already signed up to receive our free Monthly Newsletter? Don’t miss out on the latest news on all things planning and architecture related plus national news and projects we have worked on – sign up to receive your copy at the following link.

Planning & Design celebrate 20 years

19th June 202317th May 2022 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice are celebrating their Emerald anniversary in May 2022, having achieved 20 years of success in providing town planning services, architectural expertise and specialised heritage advice.

Founded in May 2002 by Jonathan Jenkin, Planning & Design Practice has since forged an excellent reputation for winning approvals and for creating attractive and sustainable proposals. Comprising RTPI Chartered town planners and RIBA Chartered Architects, the company has generated over £200m of uplift in land values for clients through its consents and proposals over the years.

In July 2021 Jonathan sold his stake in the business but retains an active role in the company as a Consultant. Specialist Conservation Architect Lindsay Cruddas and Chartered Town Planner Michael Bamford joined Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) Chartered Town Planners Richard Pigott and Jon Millhouse as Directors. This diversification of the board represented both our increasing architectural ambition and the continuing growth of our Sheffield office.

Jonathan Jenkin, Consultant said “I am immensely proud of what we have achieved over the past twenty years, the clients we have helped and the problems we have solved and continue to solve. In the end our work is about problem solving, understanding our client’s needs, and providing a bridge between the client and the Local Planning Authority.”

Richard Pigott, Director, says “The team continues to evolve with the development of our architectural team now that we are an RIBA Chartered Practice, the growth of our Sheffield office and the success of our heritage team. Whilst building on our expertise and experience in rural development we are increasingly working on major high profile projects as well. Our aim is to build on and enhance the reputation established over the last 20 years.”

The architectural side of the business boasts true international expertise, with our team of RIBA Chartered Architects and Architectural Assistants having worked on large scale projects across Europe and the United States as well as in the UK. The company is able to design award winning proposals for a wide range of clients across the country.

During our 20 years of business, we have worked with a diverse range of clients including landowners, existing business owners, farmers and other architects including Matthew Montague, John Smedleys Ltd, Chevin Homes, Derby and Burton University Hospitals Trust, Evans Vettori, Derbyshire County Council, Elvaston Castle and Garden Trust, Callow Hall – Wildhive, Meadowview Homes, and Microsoft Rare Ltd.

Recently, following a Public Inquiry, we secured outline planning permission for an extension to Denby Hall Business Park, one of the largest permissions of its kind which secured the retention of 100 jobs and the creation of a further 680 new jobs in a significant boost to the local economy of Amber Valley.

Our heritage work was recognised and awarded the Highly Commended Certificate for Excellence in Planning for Heritage & Culture at the 2019 and 2021 RTPI East Midlands Awards for Planning Excellence, for our work on the redevelopment of the ‘East Site’ at John Smedley Mills, Lea Bridge and the redevelopment of Ambergate Social Club respectively. We were recently appointed as Heritage Planning Consultants by Elvaston Castle and Garden Trust, in partnership with Derbyshire County Council for the proposed £35 million restoration and transformation of the in the 321-acre Derbyshire estate.

Comprising RTPI Chartered town planners, RIBA Chartered Architects and architectural assistants, plus heritage specialists, Planning & Design Practice are headquartered in Derby, with offices in Sheffield as well as Matlock and Macclesfield. For more information, or to discuss your own project please get in touch.

Appeals – a beginners guide

5th December 202227th April 2022 by Gary Stringer

The planning appeals process is often seen as something of a dark art shrouded in secrecy. Here, our Director Richard Pigott seeks to demystify the process with some key facts about what you can expect when you seek to challenge a council’s decision.

Planning appeals are decided by the Planning Inspectorate (PINs), an independent governmental body based in Bristol but with Inspectors based all over the country.

Appeals are typically lodged by an applicant against the refusal of planning permission, although it is also possible to appeal against specific planning conditions on an approval. In fact, you don’t actually have to wait for the council to make a decision before you lodge an appeal – if the application is not determined within the statutory time frame (8 weeks for householder and minor applications and 13 weeks for major applications) you can appeal against non-determination of the application. However, you should think twice before doing so as appeals are not a quick option – they generally take 4-6 months to decide. But if you know which direction the application is heading you can effectively take matters out of the council’s hands and leave it to PINs to decide.

There are 3 types of appeal procedures: written representations; an informal hearing; and an inquiry.

It is possible to request a particular procedure, although PINs will ultimately decide on the most appropriate procedure based upon a number of criteria.

Most appeals will be decided by way of written representations, with only the more complex and/or controversial appeals being determined by hearings or inquiries. The informal hearing takes the form of a round the table discussion led by the Inspector whereas the format of a Public Inquiry is more adversarial and legal representation in the form of a barrister is often sought. A benefit of these processes is that they provide opportunities for presentation and discussion of the evidence from both the Council and the appellant and 3rd party expert witnesses can be invited. Thus, your credibility as appellant and the positive aspects of a project can be promoted to best effect. It follows, therefore, that appeal costs can ramp up significantly, particularly for a public inquiry.

Something we are often asked by clients is whether they will get their costs back if they win the appeal. Parties in planning appeals normally meet their own expenses and costs do not, as a rule, follow the result. However, where a party has:

– (1) behaved unreasonably; and
– (2) this has directly caused another party to incur unnecessary or wasted expense, they may be subject to an award of costs.

In practice, examples where costs may be awarded include, inter alia, failure to substantiate a stated reason for refusal; Planning Authorities clearly failing to have regard to government policy or its own adopted policies; Appellants pursuing a clear ‘no hope’ case; Late withdrawal of an appeal, late cancellation of an event or late cancellation of an enforcement notice.

Another question we are often asked is what are the chances of success at appeal? For householder appeals in 2021/22, 36% of appeals were allowed. For all other appeals (excluding enforcement and listed building appeals) the figures for 2021/22 show that the percentage of appeals allowed was 28% for written representations, 37% for hearings and 55% for inquiries. Nationally the average success rate is around 36% of all appeals, although this varies significantly depending on the type of appeal.

It is clear, therefore, that the chances of success improve significantly when the appellant is able to put their case more extensively and persuasively at a hearing or inquiry. It is, however, also fair to say that a well-argued case will significantly improve one’s chances of success whichever procedure an appeal follows. At PDP we pride ourselves on doing exactly this and in this link will showcase some case studies which illustrate the breadth of our appeals experience.

Richard Pigott, Director – Chartered Town Planner, Planning & Design Practice Ltd

Could Agricultural Transition and Biodiversity Net Gain be unlikely bedfellows?

28th November 202217th February 2022 by Gary Stringer

Our Director and Chartered Town Planner, Richard Pigott reflects on Agricultural Transition and the links with biodiversity net gain targets incorporated in the Environment Act 2021.

I attended an event this week on Agricultural Transition which is being described as the most significant change in agricultural policy for over 50 years. As a consequence of Brexit the UK has the opportunity to devise its own system of rural grants and payments that provide help to the farming industry. This was of particular interest for two reasons. Firstly, because many of our clients are farmers or own rural properties and it is important to have some understanding of the pressures they are facing in this period of transition so that we can advise them on potential farm diversification projects. Secondly, there are a multiplicity of new environmental schemes which have implications for the whole development industry in light of the legal requirement (by virtue of the Environment Act 2021) that all development must achieve a 10% net gain in biodiversity by late 2023 . Biodiversity net gain can be achieved on-site, off-site or through a combination of on-site and off-site measures. To achieve biodiversity net gain, proposals must follow the ‘mitigation hierarchy’ which compels planning applicants to avoid harm in the first instance, then mitigate or finally compensate for losses on-site, off-site or through a combination of the two solutions. These measures will be required in planning conditions and legal agreements.

In some cases, applicants/developers will own land nearby that can help them to achieve the 10% figure but in more cases it will be necessary to identify land in 3rd party ownership that can be ‘improved’ and managed in an ecologically friendly way for at least 30 years in order to obtain planning consent. This could either be done by approaching landowners directly or by approaching a 3rd party organisation who effectively act as an agent, bringing together landowners and developers – as one such company puts it, “Through a network of habitat banks, we’ve launched Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) Credits – a groundbreaking new product that gives developers a simple, risk-free way to implement BNG and at the same time provides the opportunity for landowners to diversify their business. It has the power to unlock sustainable development and restore nature.

Whether this approach will be quite so simple in practice remains to be seen. Will the costs of BNG credits be prohibitive, making some development unviable? Will there be enough BNG credits to go round once the legal requirement takes effect in around 18 months time? Is there the resource to enforce such management agreements in the long term?

These are interesting times for the agricultural industry and it could well be that Biodiversity Net Gain is coming along at the right time for farmers and landowners.

Richard Pigott, Director, Planning & Design Practice Ltd

Cheshire East Local Plan (Part 2) set for public interrogation

29th November 202228th July 2021 by Gary Stringer

The examination of Cheshire East Council’s Site Allocations and Development Policies Document (SADPD) has commenced, having been submitted for examination on 29 April 2021. The independent examination will assess whether the plan has been prepared in accordance with legal and procedural requirements and if it is sound. The SADPD forms the second part of the Council’s Local Plan, adding greater detail to the overarching Local Plan Strategy (LPS) which was adopted in July 2017. If the LPS is anything to go by, adoption of the SADPD is unlikely to be a straightforward affair. More than 2,700 people and organisations voiced their views on the SADPD. Some of the main issues/objections raised in the representations to date include:

Housing land supply is inadequate and needs to be boosted through further allocations at all tiers of the settlement hierarchy
Housing allocations at Local Service Centres should be reinstated into the SADPD
Some components of the Council’s five-year housing land supply are questionable
Various sites are promoted as further or alternative allocations to those currently chosen
The requirement to demonstrate ‘exceptional circumstances’ has not been met to alter the Green Belt boundary in order to designate safeguarded land around Local Service Centres
A number of the policy requirements in the Plan will adversely affect the viability of new development
There is a need to further review and make changes to settlement, infill village, Strategic Green Gap and Green Belt boundaries

The public hearings, where agents, landowners and members of the public are able to speak on the proposed plan, are set to take place in late September and early October. The Local Plan Strategy ran into serious difficulties and a legal challenge meant that although the hearings started in 2014 it was a further 3 years before the document was actually adopted. It remains to be seen whether the second part of the Local Plan will enjoy a smoother passage through the examination process.

Richard Pigott is a Director at Planning & Design Practice and formerly worked as a Planning Officer at Macclesfield Borough Council before it became part of Cheshire East Council.

Planning & Design announce new Directors

29th November 202223rd June 2021 by Gary Stringer

Planning & Design Practice Ltd are excited to announce two new additions to its Board of Directors.

With effect from July 1, 2021, Specialist Conservation Architect Lindsay Cruddas and Chartered Town Planner Michael Bamford join Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) Chartered Town Planners Richard Pigott, and Jon Millhouse as Directors of the Derby based team of town planning consultants, architects, and heritage specialists. This diversification of the board represents both our increasing architectural ambition and the continuing growth of our Sheffield office.

Lindsay said: “After leading the Architectural Team for over 6 years I’m delighted to be appointed as a Director. The change in the company reinforces our practice core values that Planning and Architecture go hand in hand to make spaces better for the people who live in and use them. We are all excited to assist our clients in developing new and exciting projects.”

Michael added “I am excited to be a part of the next chapter in the future of Planning & Design. We have seen considerable growth over the past 2 years within the Yorkshire region as well as across the country and I look forward to working with the team to continue to deliver projects we are proud of.”

The news coincides with the announcement that Planning & Design’s Founder Jonathan Jenkin is stepping down as Managing Director to work part time in a consultancy role.

Jonathan said: “In order to strike a better work/life balance I am stepping back to work part time. The new Directors are talented and ambitious, they will bring fresh drive and capability to the company and this change represents an important milestone. I wish the new board every success and as they represent all aspects of the company’s business, I am confident that the company has a bright future as leaders in architecture and town planning. This is certainly not a goodbye from me, and I look forward to my new role as Chairman of the Board, and the opportunities it presents to strengthen relationships with our key clients as well as develop new ones.”

A chartered town planning consultant and building designer, Jonathan has developed the company, established its core values and delivered many hundreds of projects since the company was founded in 2002.

As Managing Director of Planning & Design, Jonathan has been responsible for the company’s overall operation on a day-to-day basis, working together with existing Directors Richard Pigott and Jon Millhouse on developing, implementing, and informing the strategic vision for the business.

Since being founded in 2002 Planning & Design Practice Ltd has generated over £200m of uplift in land values for clients through its consents and proposals and has an excellent reputation for winning approvals and for creating attractive and viable proposals. The architectural side of the business boasts an approachable and experienced team comprising architects, architectural assistants, designers, and technicians. Our architects have true international expertise having worked on large scale projects in Russia, Germany, Spain and the United States as well as across the UK. The company is able to design award winning proposals for a wide range of clients across the country.

The company also has a heritage team who can advise on listed buildings and developments in sensitive locations whilst maintaining a strong planning consultancy team. In 2019 our heritage work was recognised and awarded the Highly Commended Certificate for Excellence in Planning for Heritage & Culture at the recent RTPI East Midlands Awards for Planning Excellence 2019. The Highly Commended Certificate was for our work on the redevelopment of the ‘East Site’ at John Smedley Mills, Lea Bridge.

Planning & Design Practice has a close connection with Sheffield, having long maintained an office in the city and with numerous clients and projects in the region. In 2019 the company made a significant investment in their presence in Sheffield with a move to new premises at The Workstation, the city’s leading business centre for creative talent and innovation in the heart of its thriving Cultural Industries Quarter.

Speaking on behalf of the current Directors, Richard Pigott said:

“We are delighted to welcome Michael and Lindsay as Directors, having worked with them both for a number of years. They will bring fresh energy and different perspectives to the company as we strive to achieve our strategic objectives. After 10 years of working with and learning from Jonathan we are also delighted he will remain an integral part of the business as his vast experience and contacts will continue to be important for the business.”

Everton’s £500 million new stadium given council approval

29th November 202217th March 2021 by Gary Stringer

Everton Football Club’s 25 year search for a new stadium has reached a key milestone, writes keen Everton fan and Planning & Design Practice Ltd Director Richard Pigott. Planning applications for a new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock and a community-led legacy project at Goodison Park were unanimously approved by Liverpool City Council at a meeting last month.

The decision to grant approval for a new 52,888-capacity waterfront stadium and the outline application for a re-imagined Goodison Park (the club’s home since 18925) brings both projects a significant step closer. Everton worked closely with the Liverpool Planning Authority, Historic England and other stakeholders for the past 12-months as part of the planning application process, and for around 2 years prior to that.

It was not all plain sailing though. Historic England said that while it supports Everton’s need for a “state-of-the-art” stadium and the benefits it could bring, it advised the council to refuse the application. In a statement, it said the plan to infill the dock would “fundamentally change its historic character” and result in “substantial harm” to the significance of the Grade II listed dock. It added it could also damage the waterfront’s World Heritage Site status.

However, the LPA considered that the significant social and economic public benefits of the new stadium outweighed the harm to the heritage assets of the site, also noting that the club had committed to spending £55m in preserving and celebrating the heritage assets as well as creating a heritage centre around the currently derelict Hydraulic Tower. The club had also amended the proposals, including removing the multi-storey car park from the west quay, thus creating a stepped plaza forming a key part of the site’s public realm which can be used on non-matchdays, and by reducing the overall height of the stadium in line with Liverpool City Council’s World Heritage Site Supplementary Planning Document.

The Secretary of State will now decide whether to overturn or uphold the committee’s decision, and the UNESCO World Heritage status will be reviewed later this year. This is standard practice for a development of this size and scale and the Government will have an initial 21 days to review the application before reaching a decision.

Watch this space.

For more information and images please visit https://www.peoples-project.co.uk/

Main Image: The People’s Project, Pattern Design

5 year housing land supply not always the ‘trump card’ for local authorities

29th November 202216th February 2021 by Gary Stringer

An appeal inspector’s decision to approve plans for up to 90 homes in Shirland, North East Derbyshire is an important reminder that a robust housing land supply is not always the determining factor when assessing greenfield planning applications, writes Planning & Design Practice Director Richard Pigott.

In this decision, an outline planning application for up to 90 dwellings had been refused by North East Derbyshire District Council (NEDDC) in July 2020. The council had asserted that the site lay outside the defined settlement boundary for Shirland (and therefore in open countryside according to the 2005 Local Plan) and that given that there was a housing land supply of somewhere between 6.32 and 8.3 years, this would be an unwarranted intrusion into the countryside with harmful landscape and heritage impacts.

However, crucially, the Inspector concluded that two polices which were held to be amongst the most important policies for determining the appeal were ‘out of date’. The two policies were GS6 (which set out when development may occur in the countryside) and GS1 (which precludes development outside settlement boundaries save for exceptional circumstances). The inspector determined that both policies were more restrictive than the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and accordingly ‘out of date’. As a consequence, the ‘tilted balance’ under paragraph 11(d)(ii) of the NPPF was engaged, meaning that planning permission should be granted unless the adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

Whilst NEDDC did have relevant policies within an emerging plan, the inspector decided that they did not constitute the most important policies for determining the appeal. Given that the development provided much-needed housing (including 20% affordable housing), the inspector gave significant weight to the benefits of the scheme. However, she also gave significant weight to the breaches of North East Derbyshire’s development plan as well as harm to the landscape. Since the factors in favour and against the proposal were broadly balanced, the inspector concluded that the harm would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

This decision re-emphasises that a local plan can still be out of date even if a council can demonstrate a robust five-year land supply, and it re-emphasises the importance of having an up-to-date plan. The full appeal decision can be accessed here.