Ace Airport Parking Ltd brought a s.289 appeal against an Inspector’s decision to refuse planning permission for a multi-storey car park and ride scheme serving Gatwick Airport.
The appeal site was located in Tandridge Council. Tandridge’s Local Plan contained a policy which sought joint working between Tandridge, neighbourhouring authorities and Gatwick Airport to mitigate the planning impacts of the airport and in particular to minimise private car use to and from the airport. Crawley a neighbouring authority submitted objections to the Inspector based on its own local policy which provided that no airport parking should be permitted outside the perimeter of Gatwick. Crawley commented that the proposed development in Tandridge would be in conflict with its policy GAT3.
Ace Airport alleged that the Inspector had fallen into error by applying Crawley’s development plan to a proposal located in another development area i.e. in Tandridge and that it was unlawful for the Inspector even to take account the conflict with Crawley’s policy GAT3.
HHJ Jarman QC rejected that argument. On a fair reading of the Decision Letter, he found that the Inspector had distinguished between the applicable development (that of Tandridge Council) and Crawley’s objections which were material considerations to which he could accord such weight as he saw fit. The fact that Crawley had a recently adopted policy on the location of airport parking and to which it had made reference was relevant to the weight to be accorded to its objections.
Sarah Sackman acted for the successful Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government