|
|
|
|
Town and Country Planning Act 1990, 1990, Part VII, Section 171A
For the purposes of this Act —
constitutes a breach of planning control.
Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, section 85
In exercising or performing any functions in relation to, or so as to affect, land in an area of outstanding natural beauty in England, a relevant authority [ ] must seek to further the purpose of conserving and enhancing the the natural beauty of the area of outstanding natural beauty
GPDO Schedule 2 Part 8 Class A
Permitted development is development by railway undertakers on their operational land, required in connection with the movement of traffic by rail
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Section 263
1. |
Subject to the following provisions of this section and to section 264, in this Act 'operational land' means, in relation to statutory undertakers -
|
|
2. |
Paragraphs a. and b. of subsection 1. do not include land which, in respect of its nature and situation, is comparable rather with land in general than with land which is used, or in which interests are held, for the purpose of the carrying on of statutory undertaking |
|
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)
An area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB) is land protected by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW Act). It protects the land to conserve and enhance its natural beauty.
Operational Land
Operational land is a legal term with implications for planning permission and development rights.
Permitted development rights: Operational land often has special 'permitted development rights', allowing for certain types of construction and expansion without requiring full planning application
Reduced restrictions: The classification allows a public body or utility to perform works necessary for its undertaking with fewer regulatory hurdles
For the legal treatment of operational land see
Judicial review
Judicial review is a type of legal case where a judge (or judges) reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public authority.
The judge does not decide if the original decision made by the public authority was right or wrong; instead, they look at the process of the decision making and decide if it was lawful and if the correct processes were used.
Permitted development
Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) England Order 2015 (GPDO 2015) grants planning permission for certain types of development without consent from the local planning authority. Such development is called permitted development.
Railway Undertaker
Greater Anglia is a (statutory) 'railway undertaker'.
In recognition of their special status, statutory undertakers have privileges regarding development and highways access. They are often exempt from planning permission for small works.
Certificate of Lawful Proposed Use or Development (CLOPUD)
A Certificate of Lawful Proposed Use or Development (CLPUD also known as a CLOPUD) allows you to obtain a decision from the Local Planning Authority that a proposed use or works does not require planning permission and is lawful under section 192 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Enforcement notice
An enforcement notice is a notice served against unauthorised development requiring the unauthorised development to be demolished.
Environmental impact assessment screening opinion
A screening opinion states whether the [local planning] Authority or Secretary of State considers that an
Environmental impact assessment (EIA)
Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is the assessment of the environmental consequences of a plan, policy, program, or actual project prior to the decision to move forward with the proposed action. In this context, the term 'environmental impact assessment' is usually used when applied to actual projects by individuals or companies
EIA Regulations
EIA Regulations are the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 in England, which require developers to conduct an
Google AI Overview
Manningtree Station development plot was not operational. Manningtree Station development was NOT permitted development
Planning law lays out that
So was the Manningtree Station development permitted development?
The development plot was not operational (see below).
Hence Manningtree Station development was NOT permitted development.
Plot operational status is determined by the two subsections making up
|
Subject to the following provisions of this section and to section 264, in this Act 'operational land' means, in relation to statutory undertakers– |
|
a. |
land which is used for the purpose of carrying on their undertaking, and |
b. |
land in which an interest is held for that purpose. |
Mott MacDonald
In accordance with S.263 of the TCPA, GA's operational land comprises land which is used for the purpose of carrying on their undertaking and land in which an interest is held for that purpose.
And
The car park expansion site is currently unused, however, was transferred to GA with the intention of being used for future operational purposes pertaining to Manningtree Station.
We ask: Did Greater Anglia really have any choice whether or not to take on the plot together with the rest of its station? (Who else, if not Greater Anglia, would have/could have taken on a couple of acres of land locked sloping marshy waste land within a Greater Anglia train station?)
Paragraphs a. and b. of subsection 1. do not include land which, in respect of its nature and situation, is comparable rather with land in general than with land which is used, or in which interests are held, for the purpose of the carrying on of statutory undertakings
In respect of its nature and situation Manningtree Station development plot had
Mott MacDonald's
(Greater Anglia generated a very similar
Nothing in common with station land
In a 2017 letter to Tendring Council Greater Anglia describes the development plot as
scrubland, but also forms part of the natural water course
& the proposed works
extending the existing ground level car park into the unused scrubland along its rear boundary
Manningtree Station car park development plot was sloping marshy scrubland between the original car park and the station boundary beneath:
The plot had nothing in common with land used at railway stations. This is why it needed so much attention:
Brandon Station proposal: from overlooked law to High Court quash
Greater Anglia wrote a
provide detail of the planned construction of a car park facility to serve the railway station at Brandon and how it is
The letter quotes the following planning law:
Development by railway undertakers on their
Whether or not a plot is operational land (& thereby eligible for permitted development rights) is determined by the two subsections making up
The letter rehashes subsection one:
In accordance with s263 of the TCPA, GA 's operational land comprises land which is used for the purpose of carrying on their undertaking and land in which an interest is held for that purpose.
The letter omits subsection two.
Over 1,000 words later, starting to wind down, the letter reasserts that the Brandon Station development is permitted development. It was not. (See below.)
SAVE Britain's Heritage solicitor Susan Ring contacted Breckland District Council:
Special permitted development rights could not be used to deliver the car park expansion and that full planning permission was required.
Special development rights are available to railway operators on their station operational land, but
could not be used to expand the car park onto "waste land" outside the operational area of the station.
Breckland District Council ignored Susan Ring & issued a
Richard Harwood OBE KC writes
The High Court has quashed a certificate of lawfulness of proposed use or development (CLOPUD) for the construction of a new car park at Brandon railway station.
Breckland District Council had failed to consider lawfully whether the car park was entirely on operational land, since operations land does not include 'land which, in respect of its nature and situation, is comparable rather with land in general than with land which is used, or in which interests are held, for the purpose of the carrying on of statutory undertakings': Town and Country Planning Act 1990, s 26[3](2)
planningresource.co.uk writes
SAVE's case was not contested by Greater Anglia