High Court dismisses challenge to Dulwich Hamlet redevelopment planning permission.

The High Court has dismissed a challenge to the London Borough of Southwark’s decision to grant planning permission for the redevelopment of the Champion Hill Stadium, the ground of Dulwich Hamlet Football Club (DHFC), and the neighbouring Astroturf pitch.

Objector Philip Addison said the Astroturf pitch was used extensively for recreation and, although only freely accessible to the public since 2018, was an asset for the local community. Under the planning permission, DHFC's pitch will be moved onto the Astroturf and the public provided with a smaller artificial pitch and a multi-functional kickabout space.

Mr Justice Saini noted in his judgment Southwark undertook a substantial consultation and a large number of objections were received relating to the impact of the proposal on open spaces and the loss of the Astroturf. He said four issues were before the court: did the council make a mistake of fact in relation to open space deficiency; did the council fail properly to apply Policy 3.27 of the Southwark Plan (2007); did the council consider compliance with London Plan Policy 3.6, London Plan Policy 3.19, and Strategic Policy 11 of the 2011 Core Strategy; has the council breached the Public Sector Equality Duty?

Saini J noted metropolitan open land such as the Astroturf pitch “is given the same very high level of protection as the Green Belt” in terms of the policy protection it receives. He said planning committee members were told in an officer’s report the Astroturf would be lost and it was in too poor condition for formal sports, but there were strong local feelings about the loss of informal play space. Southwark concluded ‘very special circumstances’ existed to justify the impact on metropolitan open land and that the new kickabout space would be a suitable replacement for the Astroturf.

Mr Addison said Southwark made a factual mistake as to whether the application site was in an area of open space deficiency. Saini J said he was shown a map that “shows that the application site sits within a series of contiguous open spaces and within close walking distance of a number of other open spaces”. He said this demonstrated the site was “surrounded by other accessible open space within walking distance which is consistent with the planning judgement”. The ground concerning failure to properly apply policies on ’other open space’ fell for being “built on the false premise” that the Astroturf was designated under this policy when it in fact was not. Mr Addison’s ground that Southwark failed to apply policies on play and informal recreation fell because the council’s submissions “provide a complete answer”, Saini J said.

The ground concerning the public sector equality duty was argued on the basis that officers lacked data on the demographics of Astroturf users, many of whom were from the local black and minority ethnic community. Saini J said: “I consider that the evidential record demonstrates that in substance the council had due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between those sharing protected characteristics.” He said Southwark had not been required to further investigate users of the Astroturf and it was not unreasonable to make the decision on the information available. The absence of an express reference to race in the officer’s report “does not in my judgment demonstrate a failure to fulfil the [duty] when considered against the totality of the decision-making process”, Saini J concluded.

Mark Smulian is a freelance journalist specialising in local government, law, travel, transport, housing, construction and planning.