Shapps agreed the £1.7bn eight-mile road project under the National Planning Policy Statement for National Networks despite the advice of a panel of planning inspectors that it would cause ‘substantial harm’ to the World Heritage Site (WHS). The panel said the road ‘would substantially and permanently harm the integrity of the WHS, now and in the future…[and]…taken as a whole, would lead to substantial harm’.
The road, which would include two miles of tunnel beneath the ancient site, was fiercely opposed by campaigners.
Ruling in R (oao Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site (SSWHS)) v Secretary of State for Transport [2021] EWHC 2161 (Admin), Mr Justice Holgate upheld two of the ten grounds for challenge.
He held Shapps had not properly assessed the risk of harm to each heritage asset within the World Heritage Site. Therefore, he was in breach of the terms of both the National Policy Statement and the Planning Act 2008, which required the impact of the project to be weighed by the Secretary of State.
Moreover, Holgate J said Shapps erred in law by failing to consider alternatives to the scheme, such as a longer tunnel that would have avoided Stonehenge.
He said: ‘In this case the relative merits of the alternative tunnel options compared to the western cutting and portals were an obviously material consideration which the SST was required to assess. It was irrational not to do so.’
Holgate J was also clear that, given the panel of planning inspectors found substantial harm would be caused, it would be wholly exceptional to treat that level of harm as acceptable.
Leigh Day solicitor Rowan Smith, who acted for SSWSS, said: ‘This is a huge victory, which means, for now, Stonehenge is safe.’
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=e3c4b2f1_1)
