Claimant behind judicial review of 4000-home development calls on council to settle dispute via mediation
A claimant that recently acquired permission from the High Court for a legal challenge concerning the impact of a 4,000-home Cambridgeshire development on a nearby town’s water supply has asked South Cambridgeshire District Council to agree to alternative dispute resolution.
In June of this year, Mrs Justice Lang granted permission for Fews Lane Consortium's judicial review of the local authority's planning approval for phase 3A of the construction of a new town named Northstowe.
The grounds allege that the council ignored the water quality policy of its development plan, misdirected its planning committee about a possible deferral of the decision to obtain further environmental information, and irrationally failed to require the applicant's Environmental Impact Assessment to consider issues of water supply.
It is also alleged that the council failed to publish the required statement of its reasoned conclusions of the environmental effects of the development.
In a letter sent earlier this month to the leader of the council, Cllr Bridget Smith, Fews Lane Consortium's director, Daniel Fulton, said he remains confident that the claim for judicial review of the Northstowe Phase 3A planning decision will be successful.
"However, the Consortium is also mindful that the only appropriate remedy available to the court is a quashing order, which would result in significant delays to the development of Northstowe, further delay the delivery of important community facilities, and potentially jeopardise the ability of the district council to maintain a 5-year land supply for housing in the coming years," Mr Fulton added.
He wrote that concerns in Longstanton could be addressed if an adequate Environmental Impact Assessment were to be undertaken and an updated environmental statement made available to the public.
He wrote: "This course of action would avoid the need for the Phase 3A planning permission to be quashed, which is the most likely outcome if the judicial review proceeds to the final hearing scheduled for 29 and 30 November.
"The purpose of this letter is ask the district council to participate in mediation with an independent third party mediator in order to resolve the dispute."
On behalf of Longstanton Parish Council, the district council previously commissioned HR Wallingford to investigate the reasons for the reduction in water levels at a pond in the village.
The council's website states that while HR Wallingford associated the construction of Northstowe with the reduced water levels in the pond and suggested that the pond and the groundwater were in hydraulic continuity, "they did not make any further connection to specific infrastructure".
The council added: "The council has sought clarification from developers L&Q Estates about the relationship of the drainage scheme with the groundwater. L&Q Estates have suggested that the development is not responsible for this change. There are ongoing investigations of potential routes for movement of groundwater from near to the Kingfisher Pond but there is no firm conclusion on this matter currently. The council is continuing to work with the developer on this matter and is seeking further comment from L&Q Estates in response to recent comments."
Regarding the legal action, a spokesperson for the council said: "Fews Lane Consortium has brought a case for Judicial Review of the decision by the Council's Planning Committee to grant planning permission for Northstowe Phase 3A. The council notes the court's decision permitting the challenge to proceed to a full hearing, and expects to explain to the court at that hearing how it has reached its conclusions on this application, and that it came to a lawful decision. As this is a live legal case, it would not be appropriate to comment further."
They also emphasised that the judicial review does not regard groundwater concerns at Longstanton and instead concerns wider issues about water supply.
A petition published by the consortium calling upon the district council to pursue alternative dispute resolution has been signed by almost 200 people.
Adam Carey
