[2024] UKUT 0414 (LC)

For the applicant, Ms Lyne submitted that the restriction should be deemed obsolete under ground (a). Since it was imposed in 1959, the application land and its use had altered significantly. The sheds and silos erected in the 1970s did not comply with the height restriction, and they were physically altered in 1999 by the provision of windows looking out over the field. If an indirect objective of the restriction was to prevent the use of the land except for agricultural purposes, that use had ceased in 1999.

The character of the neighbourhood had altered materially since 1959, by development of the Icknield Way Industrial Estate 500m to the east; construction of the Aston Clinton bypass with two new roundabouts - only 120m from Drayton Holloway - and a new development of 226 dwellings on land to the south of the application site. The neighbourhood could no longer be described as simply rural, but was better characterised as an edge of settlement area.

In summary, the objective of preventing use other than for agriculture could no longer be achieved because neither the present commercial use of the buildings, nor the applicant’s conversion scheme breach the restriction. The end result and eventual use of the redevelopment scheme would be substantially the same.

In the alternative, Ms Lyne submitted that the redevelopment would cause no injury to the objectors and should therefore be discharged or modified under ground (c). Under ground (aa) she submitted that the proposed use for the redevelopment scheme was reasonable, was impeded by the restriction and did not secure any practical benefits for the objectors when compared with the conversion scheme. Should the Tribunal determine that the restriction does secure some limited benefit then a small amount of money would be adequate compensation.