How a planner got planning permission.

[Big Jimbo]

Actually i have just had a thought. We should all be complete experts in the NPPF and all of the local councils saved policies / local plan, etc. That way we could tick a box at the end of our applications to say that we have considered and met all the local and national Policies. That would save the planning officers having to do anything except send out our approved letters. Some of them might actually get the letters out within 8 weeks then. Obviously not all of them. That would be way too hard.

[saveasteading]

22 minutes ago, Big Jimbo said:

most skim" they all skim

No, it's worse than that. Most do no prep at all, then want time to think about it during the meeting. At Borough level there are politics involved and most councillors look to their leader and follow suit. 

At parish level, there is a danger of vested local interests dominating. Training is available but many don't want it.

All these councillors are elected. Why don't you stand?

[joe90]

25 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

At Borough level there are politics involved and most councillors look to their leader and follow suit. 

That happened to me, despite the fact I knew more than one councillor had no problem with my application they all voted to refuse (and would not look me in the eye at the council meeting (good job i appealed 🖕)

[Big Jimbo]

18 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

All these councillors are elected. Why don't you stand?

No vacancies, or elections at the moment. in fairness i dont intend staying in the area. However, i did take an active part in the local neighbourhood plan. This was made up of one member of the P.C. and the rest of us just residents. About 10 people in total. Most of the residents openly said that they wanted to help because they wanted to block any new housing. We wrote a series of questions and hand delivered about 5000 of them. had about 450 responses. Held an open day etc etc. The leader then said that the responses would be run passed the P.C. I questioned why, as this should be what the local people want, not the P.C. I was then told that any policies would have to align with the wishes of the P.C. That was when i walked. I then found that in the first draft of policies that they had written had little to do with the responses from the public, and everything to do with what the P.C. wanted. Parish Councils should be wound up.

[Johnnyt]

In my experience, if the LPA don't like it, even when presented with compelling case law, a plethora of appeal decisions they will go to the ends of the earth to refuse.

My appeal document was over 10K words with 30 plus appendicies which they still battled.

They lost and lost handsomely, and I got my costs back and permission for 2 dwellings rather than just the one I wanted.

Poetic justice.

 

Something of night with one of my local councillors.

 

[Ferdinand]

16 hours ago, Johnnyt said:

In my experience, if the LPA don't like it, even when presented with compelling case law, a plethora of appeal decisions they will go to the ends of the earth to refuse.

My appeal document was over 10K words with 30 plus appendicies which they still battled.

They lost and lost handsomely, and I got my costs back and permission for 2 dwellings rather than just the one I wanted.

Poetic justice.

 

Something of night with one of my local councillors.

 

I'll address the proposal in this thread and the doc separately.

 

However, on Councils and Appeals - my small housing estate proposal received what I call a "political no", despite a recommendation from the Planning Dept to approve. That is, the Councillors on the Planning Committee did not want to be held politically responsible for saying Yes.

 

It went through on Appeal instantly (about 6 weeks), but the local Councillors had improved their chances of votes.

 

In my view the Planning Inspectorate are the most strategic body in the Planning arena, as the only one that is committed only to following law. 

 

[ToughButterCup]

1 hour ago, Ferdinand said:

...

In my view the Planning Inspectorate are the most strategic body in the Planning arena, as the only one that is committed only to following law. 

 

Exactly right.

[ToughButterCup]

18 hours ago, Johnnyt said:

...

they will go to the ends of the earth to refuse.

...

 

Because it costs Councillors  nothing - personally - to refuse.

[saveasteading]

23 hours ago, Big Jimbo said:

Parish Councils should be wound up.

Unfair. Bad councillors do bad things: Change them. Proof enough that parish councils are needed is that boroughs do not want neighbourhood plans, because it gives the parish some control.

[Tony K]

7 hours ago, Ferdinand said:

I'll address the proposal in this thread and the doc separately.

 

However, on Councils and Appeals - my small housing estate proposal received what I call a "political no", despite a recommendation from the Planning Dept to approve. That is, the Councillors on the Planning Committee did not want to be held politically responsible for saying Yes.

 

It went through on Appeal instantly (about 6 weeks), but the local Councillors had improved their chances of votes.

 

In my view the Planning Inspectorate are the most strategic body in the Planning arena, as the only one that is committed only to following law. 

 

 

Yep, that's how it works, though most local authorities are increasingly aware of the implications of operating in the way you describe. 

 

As a local authority you only get to lose a certain percentage of appeals against your refusals before the government class you as 'underperforming' and (potentially) remove your decision making powers. That has generally filtered down to local authority chief execs and planning heads, who now take local councillors far more firmly in hand than was once the case. 

 

Over the last couple of decades central government has used the threat of the big stick (removal of LPA powers and/or funding) to address both speed and quality of decisions. 

 

The implications of this for applicants varies. When I first started, old planners were still in the habit of taking absolutely ages to decide applications. Sometimes this was down to inefficiency, but mostly they were engaged in significant back and forth with applicants and relevant advisors, the mindset being to work together over time to get the best scheme, rather than to make a decision within 8 weeks, as is the aim now. It's good to have a nominal end date when applying for permission, but it does come at the expense of ongoing, fruitful communication with planners. You probably can't have both, at least not often. 

 

Regarding the quality of decisions (a good decision being one that complies with planning policies and so should survive at appeal) the major reason for measuring performance is to ensure that local politicians and residents don't get in the way of national strategies. If the nation is short of houses then the regions are set targets for how many new ones they should approve. If the region doesn't meet the target then they have to be less fussy in their assessment of proposals for new houses. If they aren't then they lose at appeal. If that keeps happening then they get cut out of the decision making process altogether.

 

The opening part of my design and access statement addresses that context. I doubt I'd have got permission for my SB ten or fifteen years ago, when national policy didn't lean so heavily on my side. 

 

All of this creates an interesting tension between the centre and the regions. I have found that tension most evident between Conservative governments and Conservative local authorities. The former remain focused on national economic performance and deregulation, the latter on reasonable nimbyisim and preservation. They are on the same team, but pulling in polar opposite directions. 

 

Finally, don't be afraid of appealing against a refusal, even if only to narrow down the issues ahead of a revised resubmission. Some seem to consider a refusal to be some kind of black mark, but it is often part of the process of knocking an idea into shape, so long as you have the time. 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 16, 2022 by Tony K

[ToughButterCup]

1 hour ago, Tony K said:

... so long as you have the time. 

 

Reading with care and writing well both take time. 

I am still puzzled by those who - with many thousands of pounds at stake - allow themselves to ;

• write letters of objection about matters immaterial to the application
• draft DA statements which are little more than copies of others' applications
• think that emotion plays a part in writing a Planning Application
• disrespect the reader by writing illiterate sentences
• waffle
• imagine that they also own what they can see from the property they actually own 

I too read with  a delicious shiver the discussions between Central and Local Conservative planning officials.

Martin Goodall writes beautifully about it. Shame he retired recently.

[JLB]

Can I ask, where did you source the historical maps Tony?

Thanks

[saveasteading]

On 16/07/2022 at 17:34, Tony K said:

tension most evident between Conservative governments and Conservative local authorities.

Which includes that allowing more houses brings in immediate cash from central government ( a lot of cash), as well as the later rates.

And that the senior councillors can expect to be patted on the head and given gongs by their masters.

[Tony K]

On 02/08/2022 at 17:11, JLB said:

Can I ask, where did you source the historical maps Tony?

Thanks

 

I happened to have access to them through my work. 

 

Not sure how I'd have got them otherwise to be honest. 

[Johnnyt]

The national library of scotland has a comprehensive archive of old maps for a lot of the uk.

 

https://maps.nls.uk/

[saveasteading]

7 hours ago, Tony K said:

where did you source the historical maps

A lot are available online, although it may need a variety of search terms to find them.

I suggest looking at every one even if it looks vague, the wrong subject matter or of the wrong era, because they sometimes link in to other versions.

Also zoom in as they may change map completely in the process, or have a timeline.

 

For example a geological map may morph into a general local map.

 

Plus Google Earth has a timeline, with the oldest maps being wartime reconnaissance photos overlaid on the map.

[Raine]

 

Sorry to resurrect an old thread but I'm just starting on my D&A statement and read this bit in particular with interest.

 

On 16/07/2022 at 17:34, Tony K said:

If the nation is short of houses then the regions are set targets for how many new ones they should approve. If the region doesn't meet the target then they have to be less fussy in their assessment of proposals for new houses. If they aren't then they lose at appeal. If that keeps happening then they get cut out of the decision making process altogether.

 

The opening part of my design and access statement addresses that context. I doubt I'd have got permission for my SB ten or fifteen years ago, when national policy didn't lean so heavily on my side. 

 

 

That opening part of your D&A statement is interesting, and I have some questions about it, if you don't mind @Tony K?

 

It refers to Paragraph 49 of the NPPF, in particular the second part of that paragraph which says 'Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.'

 

You then say "The Strategic Housing Market Assessment (June 2016) identifies a shortfall in Epsom and Ewell of 418 units per annum. The effect of this is that the proposal subject of this planning application must be assessed against the second part of NPPF paragraph 14, i.e. the proposal must be approved unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of providing a new house."

 

My question, having skim-read (ha!) the SHMA that you refer to, is this:

 

• It looks to me that the 418 figure is the total annual need for new dwellings identified in 2016, which I think is not the same thing as the LPA demonstrating whether there is a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites ??
• There is no date on your D&A statement but I presume it was written not long before your post in 2022.  This leaves a gap of several years since the need / shortfall was identified, during which time the LPA might have starting approving more sites and hence reduced or eliminated any shortfall.
• I was thinking about adding something similar to my D&A statement, but presume I'd need to ask the LPA (via a FOI request maybe?) to confirm / demonstrate the future five-year supply of deliverable housing sites for the area, and then compare that figure to the identified need, and only if there is a shortfall then, the second part of NPPG Para 49 would apply??
• Or have I misunderstood?

 

P.S.  I'm only just starting on this so I will probably have more questions!  I hope you don't mind!  

 

Thanks so much for sharing your D&A statement - it is fantastic!  🌟👍