Rezoning of development lands to open space upheld after challenge over alleged reliance on irrelevant considerations

The High Court refused an application by a property development company seeking to overturn a local authority’s decision to rezone its lands from residential to open space use in the local development plan. The company argued that the rezoning was invalid because the elected members of the planning authority had relied on irrelevant considerations, such as moral obligations of a former landowner and a desire to limit planning powers of the national appeals board, and that they failed to consider relevant information, including existing planning permissions and open space analyses. The Court held that, while some references to irrelevant considerations (such as a landowner’s ‘moral obligation’) were made during council debate, these did not play a material role in the actual zoning decision, which was grounded in planning policy, public consultation, and members’ judgment on proper planning and sustainable development. The Court found that the members were entitled to disagree with the planning executive and were not bound by previous planning decisions or departmental opinions, provided their reasoning had a legitimate planning basis, which it did. As a result, the application was dismissed and the zoning as open space was upheld.