The results are in (well partly)

The Government has today published its response to the consultation on further changes to a number of permitted development rights. 

It continues to support having greater flexibility on the high street, with permitted development rights for shops to offices likely to be introduced (but giving prior approval discretion to halt changes that would hurt the town centre’s vitality).  The possibility of upward extensions to allow housing above shops is still ‘on the cards’ though needs more thought.  A similar, though possibly more luke-warm response, was also given to whether the replacement of commercial buildings with residential development should be introduced (or is this simply being kicked into the long grass?).  The permitted development rights for larger residential extensions is to be continued – but with a fee requirement to help cover local Council’s costs.  The temporary permitted development rights for B8 storage to housing are to end.

Somehow this feels a bit like tracking the local council election results – who’s in, who’s out and which area needs a recount!  At the moment the Dorset results are showing a Conservative majority (with 24 of the 82 seats declared) – but still plenty to speculate about.

Broadwindsor examined

The Examiner's report on the Broadwindsor Group Neighbourhood Plan was received at the very end of last week, recommending that the plan (as modified by some very minor changes), should proceed to a referendum.

The Examiner says "It is clear that a great deal of commitment and effort has gone into the production of the BGPNP, and that it is founded on a desire to provide suitable and environmentally friendly homes, local employment and local services, whilst protecting the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty which is highly valued by the local community."

This is likely to be the first to go in front of the new Dorset Council, who are legally required to consider the Examiner's report before the plan can have its referendum.

Laid-back Dorset

Interesting article in one of the planning magazines earlier this month regarding the differences in enforcement activity across the country. 

Taking a look at the Dorset stats for 2018, North Dorset, Purbeck and Weymouth and Portland all join the ‘laid back’ club (unless there really are no planning contraventions happening out there – which doesn’t appear to be the case from what I have heard), with no enforcement notices and only two planning contravention notices served (both in North Dorset).  West Dorset is also well below average (with 2 enforcement notices and 3 planning contravention notices served).  Only East Dorset (serving 6 enforcement notices and 13 planning contravention notices) was anywhere near “average” for a shire district.  To put this in perspective, across the Dorset Council area, there was 1 enforcement notice served for every 446 planning applications received.

Makes me wonder how many enforcement officers will be deemed necessary in the new Council – how “expedient” are they? 

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/live-tables-on-planning-application-statistics#reference-tables

Dorset Council launches

This week has seen the launch of Dorset Council - the new unitary authority replacing the old Dorset County, East Dorset, North Dorset, Purbeck, West Dorset and Weymouth Councils into one smooth and streamlined whole (we hope).

There will no doubt be teething troubles - their website has certainly been difficult to navigate with missing pages and content - but there has obviously been much going on behind the scenes in preparation.  The new planning application validation checklist is now online, plus a handy tick list by application type, which means that the local list of requirements (which for many had been out of date) now has some teeth - at least for the next two years. 

There is no notice of validation timescales - before the changeover this was running at 5 weeks for some of the councils.  Let's hope this doesn't have to get worse before it gets better!  Looking forward to see how the first planning committees operate at the end of May. 

I wonder what they would have made of the 'Headington Shark' - Bill Heine its protagonist RIP 3/4/19.  As the Planning Inspector put it back in 1992, when he considered Oxford City Council's pleas to refuse consent for its retention, "any system of control must make some small place for the dynamic, the unexpected, the downright quirky.  I therefore recommend that the Headington shark be allowed to remain"

No resting on laurels

Couple of news items of interest in the planning journals this week...

It would seem that Friends of the Earth, who challenged the sustainability credentials of the NPPF in the High Court and failed (see my earlier blogs) are not going to lay down without a fight.  According to their Barrister, Nina Pindham, they have applied to leapfrog the appeal system to take their case straight to the Supreme Court.

Also a timely reminder for Neighbourhood Plan Groups, with Middlewich having the dubious honour of being the third plan to fail at referendum.   A modest turnout (just under 20%) and a very narrow margin. 

Reading between the lines, the main angst seems to have been about the level of development proposed in the adopted Local Plan and that the Neighbourhood Plan did not argue against it (not that they could), together with the lack of a bypass to cater with the proposed growth, which although mooted has no funding.  There were also political divisions over the plan, with one party campaigning against it.  Will the town have an appetite to have a second go?

Sweet sixteen (and counting)

With Hazelbury Bryan and Sturminster Newton Neighbourhood Plans being made this week, I make that 16 plans in place across Dorset (including Poole and Bournemouth) - plenty more at Examination to add to this list later in the year.  Looking at the map there is an obvious lack of plans in East Dorset, perhaps this will change following the new Dorset Council and increased awareness of those local Members.

The NPPF is off the SEA hook

Interesting to read the judgment of Mr Justice Dove on Friends of the Earth Limited vs SoS for Housing, Communities and Local Government that was released this week - [2019] EWHC 518 (Admin)

The upshot is that the Government have been let off the legal hook for any need to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for its national planning policy framework (NPPF) – and I can hear the collective sigh of relief from Whitehall. 

The judge recognises that there is a clear case to be made that the NPPF sets "the Framework for future development consent of projects" and could clearly “have significant effects on the environment”.  However he also concluded that it did not fall within the accepted definition of a plan or programme given that its existence or preparation was not mandatory or regulated in any way.  So on this ‘technicality’ an SEA is not required. 

That doesn’t mean to say it wouldn’t have been a good idea… though a wry smile did cross my face when I read that the Government had argued that nothing worthwhile would come out of any examination of its effects.  Tell that to all the Neighbourhood Plan Groups that have to go through the SEA hoops just for allocating a few small sites for new homes!

Having said all that, I wasn't looking forward to a scenario where the NPPF was quashed - though that would have certainly provided a lot more to post about!