Skip to main content

T: 020 7353 8415

Charles Streeten

Charles Streeten

Year of call: 2013

Practice areas: Planning, Environment, Licensing, Compulsory Purchase and Compensation, Major Infrastructure Projects, Local Government, Public Law

Public Access

Charles Streeten - Planning / Infrastructure

Infrastructure

  • Charles regularly acts and advises in relation to major infrastructure projects. He has a solid understanding of the DCO process and other consenting regimes. His experience includes power stations, gas/ electrical connections, road schemes, railways, and large scale energy/ minerals development, such as:
  • Advising Hirwaun Power Limited regarding the Secretary of State’s jurisdiction to grant development consent and/or compulsory acquisition powers in a DCO for a power station in Wales.
  • Advising on the approach to alternatives in relation to a grid connection for a power station.
  • Appearing unled for the Welsh Wildlife Trust resisting the M4 CaN extension.
  • Appearing unled to resist the grant of consent for an exploratory shale gas well in Derbysire.
  • Advising a local authority on its approach to the second phase of HS2.

Residential

Charles has appeared for both developers and local authorities in numerous planning appeals concerning residential developments. He is fully conversant with the issues surrounding, and regularly acts in cases involving, the extent of a Council’s 5 year supply of housing. Recent examples include:

  • Presently acting, as junior to Hereward Philpott QC in an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for 370 dwellings. The case raises issues of housing land supply, heritage, landscape, sustainability/ transport, and prematurity.
  • Sole counsel at a 7 day inquiry, successfully resisting the grant of outline planning permission for 95 dwellings in South Cambridgeshire on landscape grounds alone, notwithstanding the absence of a five year supply of housing land (APP/W0530/W/17/3178762). The Council (not previously represented by Charles) had failed to resist the last 9 appeals against the refusal of planning permission for between 20-200 dwellings.
  • Sole counsel at a 5 day inquiry successfully resisting an appeal by a developer specialising in ‘high-quality, bespoke residential development’ (represented by Jeremy Cahill QC) against the refusal of full planning permission for 46 dwellings together with a so called ‘village green’ (APP/D3125/W/17/3182864). The appeal was dismissed on listed buildings and landscape grounds, notwithstanding the absence of a five year supply of housing land.
  • Acting for a Rule 6 party in relation to a called-in decision to grant planning permission for a tall building at Ealing Broadway.
  • Sole Counsel in 2 day inquiry in an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for a new dwelling in a conservation area in Tetbury (APP/F1610/C/16/3156262). Following cross-examination the appellant conceded that the development conflicted with the development plan and the NPPF. In light of these concessions, the inspector concluded the Appellant’s perseverance with the appeal had been unreasonable and awarded the Council its full costs (see costs decision in APP/F1610/C/16/3156262).

Other examples of Charles’ residential experience are available upon request.

Energy / Renewables

Charles has a detailed understanding of the relevant law/ policy in relation to energy development. Examples of his experience include:

  • Successfully resisting a called-in appeal against the refusal of planning permission for a Wind Farm in Leicestershire.
  • Advising Hirwaun Power Limited regarding the Secretary of State’s jurisdiction to grant development consent and/or compulsory acquisition powers in a DCO for a power station in Wales.
  • A judicial review of the grant of planning permission for a hydropower station (R (Goring-upon-Thames PC) v South Oxfordshire DC [2016] EWHC 2898 (Admin)

Minerals

Charles specialises in minerals cases which relate to sensitive locations including in the Green Belt and National Parks. He has considerable experience of minerals inquiries and judicial reviews, for example:

  • Appearing for anti-fracking campaigners at an inquiry into the grant of consent for exploratory drilling for Shale Gas in Derbyshire.
  • A challenge to the Secretary of State’s decision not to revoke planning consent for an open cast coal mine.
  • A challenge (by a rival minerals operator) to the grant of consent for an extension to a quarry in a National Park.
  • Successfully overturning the approach of the Environment Agency, the Secretary of State and the High Court to the use of material to backfill a quarry as required by a restoration condition in R (Tarmac Aggregates Ltd) v SoS Environment [2015] EWCA Civ 1149.

Heritage

Charles enjoys planning work with a heritage element. His experience ranges across inquiries, judicial reviews, and criminal prosecutions. Examples include:

  • Successfully resisting an appeal by a developer specialising in ‘high-quality, bespoke residential development’ (represented by Jeremy Cahill QC) against the refusal of full planning permission for 46 dwellings together with a so called ‘village green’ (APP/D3125/W/17/3182864). The appeal was dismissed on listed buildings and landscape grounds.
  • Defending an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for a new residential dwelling in a conservation area. Charles secured concessions in cross examination that the development conflicted with the development plan and the NPPF. Full costs were awarded against the Appellant.
  • Resisting the grant of planning permission in the called-in application for the comprehensive redevelopment of the Ealing Broadway Conservation Area.  
  • Appearing before the High Court and Court of Appeal in R (Goring-upon-Thames PC) v South Oxfordshire DC concerning s 72 of the Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act 1990 and the proper approach to discretion.
  • Successfully prosecuting a former Chair of a council’s planning committee and her partner for listed building offences resulting in a combined fin/ costs of more than £200,000

Retail / Commercial

Examples of Charles’ retail/ commercial planning experience include:

  • The appeal against the refusal of planning permission for a new Sainsbury’s store in Tadworth.
  • The appeal against the of refusal of planning consent for the redevelopment of iconic yard bar in Soho.
  • An appeal of planning permission in relation to an animal lairage site in the Cotswolds.

Advertising

Charles has is at home with the legislative scheme relating to advertising consents and has acted in a number of advertising cases including:

  • Acting for Westminster in a judicial review concerning digital advertisements on the Vue Cinema in Leicester Square.
  • Advising Westminster regarding proposed challenges to the grant of advertising consent on scaffolding in conservation areas/ adjacent to listed buildings.
  • Successfully defending a prosecution by Hackney Council relating to large advertisement in Shoreditch.

Enforcement /  Crime

Charles has experience of a wide range of enforcement issues at inquiry and in the courts.  He is at home with Certificates of Lawfulness, the the principles in Miaris and Iouannou, and the law regarding concealment under Wellyn Hatfield and Planning Enforcement Orders.

Examples of his work include:

  • Regularly appearing successfully for the Secretary of State in section 289 challenges before the High Court.
  • Regularly acting in enforcement inquiries regarding residential and commercial developments for London Boroughs including Westminster, Hackney, and Islington.
  • Successfully appealing an Enforcement Notice served against a large residential extension and securing permission on ground (a) for development described by the Inspector as “bulky”, “box like” and “not sympathetic” (see APP/N5090/C/16/3141620)
  • Appearing before the criminal courts, including the Crown Court, in prosecutions for offences under the Planning Acts and subsequent POCA proceedings.
  • Advising local authorities on complex CLEUD/ CLOPUD applications and representing them on appeal.

Injunctions

Charles is an experienced High Court advocate. He is experienced beyond his call and regularly appears in the High Court at short notice and in urgent applications. He is able to turn pleadings around very quickly if required and has experience of obtaining injunctions out of hours.

Planning Obligations / CIL

Charles has a detailed knowledge of the interrelationship between s 106 and CIL. He has advised on strategies for securing planning gain in the absence of an adopted CIL Schedule as well as on the lawfulness of s 106 agreements and planning conditions. Charles appeared successfully for Westminster in R (Working Title Films) v Westminster CC [2016] EWHC 1855 (Admin) regarding the provision of a community space under a s 106 planning obligation. He  has advised on the meaning of 'chargeable development', the correct All in Tender Pricing Index Figure, and has recovered substantial debts payable under CIL in the County Court.

Privacy Notice