High Court rejects wind farm near National Trust house

The High Court has quashed a planning inspector’s decision to approve the building of a wind farm near a historic National Trust house and garden.

The court heard that Barnwell Manor Wind Energy applied to build five wind turbines, a sub-station and access road, in Northamptonshire, close to Lyveden New Bield, a Grade One-listed Elizabethan house and garden.

The application was rejected by East Northamptonshire District Council in 2010, but a planning inspector approved it, as long as the turbine nearest the house was withdrawn.

He concluded that the benefits from the wind farm, including a contribution to the 2020 regional target for renewable energy, outweighed the harm it would cause to the setting of heritage assets. The National Trust, English Heritage and the council challenged the decision.

Mrs Justice Lang said that Lyveden New Bield was “said to be the finest surviving example of an Elizabethan garden and also of significance because it was designed to be a testament to the Catholic faith in an era of religious persecution.”

She said the planning inspector had erred in law by not giving effect to his duty under section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to consider whether a planning application affected the setting of a listed building.

Lang J said the preservation of Lyveden New Bield was not in conflict with the local development plans.

“In my judgment, the inspector did not at any stage in the balancing exercise accord ‘special weight’, or considerable importance to ‘the desirability of preserving the setting’.

“He treated the ‘harm’ to the setting and the wider benefit of the wind farm proposal as if those two factors were of equal importance.”

Lang J said the inspector’s assessment of the significance of Lyveden New Bield and its setting was “unsatisfactory” and he had failed to give adequate reasons for his finding that the wind farm would not intrude on any ‘planned view’ from the garden.

She concluded: “In my judgment, the inspector failed properly to interpret and apply the relevant planning policies on the effect of development on the setting of heritage assets.

“I accept the claimants’ submission that this error would probably have affected the balancing exercise which he was required to carry out.

“By failing properly to assess the contribution made by setting to the significance of the heritage assets, he may have failed properly to assess the overall magnitude of harm. On the balance of probabilities, it is likely therefore that the balancing exercise was flawed.”

Lang J ruled that the inspector’s decision should be quashed and the appeal reconsidered in the light of her judgment.