Search the Community

There has been a big announcement in Parliament by the Housing Minister of State about big revisions to the planning framework. These were my expectations posted elsewhere, which seem mainly to have been delivered, though not necessarily quite in this form: IMO they need to hit the vested interests which are blocks (eg speculative private land banking), in a way that aligns Local Political interests with development following the legal principles. In a way which is enforcible. My checklist of what is required: 1 Local Councillors to be focussed on long term direction / strategy / local plans, not micro-management of individual applications. 2 Individual applications to be determined by Planning Professionals following law, not Planning Committees following parish pump politics. This should also remove some conflicts of interest / opportunity for corruption, though not all. 3 Housing targets to be mandatory, and obsessed objectively. 4 Possibilities for robust intervention if local Councillors sit on their hands. 5 Planning Gain to be capped in some effective way. 6 Encouragement / facilitation for local councils to be more proactive in Compulsory Purchase, potentially involving the opportunity to intervene on sustainable (in planning terms) development sites. 7 Possibility is streamlining enforcement. 8 All of the above will require capacity building. My tentative assessments (just from the speech) on what may impact self-builders are: - Much increased pressure on councils to pass local plans, and have them in place quickly. Transitional arrangements for a few months. - The pre-Election NIMBY-pandering done by the last Government is being summarily reversed. Good. - Planning Committees powers to micro-manage individual application will be reducing. PP will be tipping towards determination by Planning Officers. - Building on grey or brown belt to become more straight forward, ie on scrubby bits of the Green Belt. Likely to be a slow-burn - 6 months not next week. - If a development follows planning principles and does not walk the edges of what is acceptable, chances of getting it through straightforwardly are better than before. - Heavy circumscribing of use of "viability assessments" by developers, which is a tool used to control the planning process. Not really relevant to self-builders, but interesting. But these are major changes, so take time to do the homework. There are a few webinars being announced. NPPF announcement and document:: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-planning-policy-framework--2#full-publication-update-history https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/675abd214cbda57cacd3476e/NPPF-December-2024.pdf

Does anybody know where the government are with progress on the National Planning Policy Framework? (This is England). I am talking to the Council, and I have just been quoted to from what I think is the Draft Version of the new NPPF. Does anyone know when this will be going active, so I can assess what I need to pay attention to for a Planning Application? I do know about our Local Plan - last month it was withdrawn AGAIN, so I think we are still on saved policies from the 2007 one or perhaps the 2002 one, and there does not yet exist an emerging Local Plan, so I think no weight can be attached to ithe new one yet. Is there any Guidance on how much weight attaches to a Withdrawn Local Plan? This app will relate to a preferred town-centre use (D2: Leisure) on an industrial estate which needs the time limit of the Use Permission extending, so it could be a bit of a shark-infested custard. Cheers Ferdinand

Mindful of the fact that there are a good few on BH who have yet to obtain planning permission, I'd like to draw attention to a well written synopsis of a recent judgement concerning isolated dwellings in the countryside. The author , Martin Goodall , has a particularly readable written style, it is well worth reading in full. The meaning of the word isolated is important, The LPA had challenged an Inspectors decision : he had allowed an appeal against the LPAs decision to refuse permission. The decision hinged in part on the interpretation of the term isolated. The LPA and Inspector understood the term to mean different things. The LPA took a more functional approach relying on map data, the Inspector sought to examine more than simple map evidence. ' ...Lindblom LJ’s observations on the boundaries of a settlement are particularly interesting, and clearly envisage a more flexible approach in this regard than the rigid adherence to designated settlement boundaries that LPAs commonly seem to adopt. ...' (Goodhall 2018, downloaded April 2018) (Emphasis added) I understand that locally (the Fylde Coast) appreciable numbers have been refused, at least in part, on the grounds of isolated development. To those affected, the article, and perhaps the full judgement (reference in the article) bears careful examination.