All posts tagged application

120328NPPF

Directors Blog on the NPPF

By on March 28, 2012 in NPPF, Planning Policy

Today has been a quiet day in the office, a time for reflection on the meaning of life and the National Planning Policy Framework that has just appeared yesterday. Yesterday we faced a barrage of phone calls from anxious clients wanting to know how they were affected by the new proposals and whether it really was the developers charter as some wilder parts of the media had suggested.

Mr A, who owns a field in the middle of nowhere in particular was most disappointed that he didn’t have his golden ticket for his new house but for other clients the position seems less clear.

On the one hand we are told that the guidance takes immediate effect and that decision makers should apply its principles straightaway. Yet buried in the back of the document, hidden in the annex is the statement that for 12months from the date of publication, decision makers may continue to give full weight to their old LDF policies, even when they conflict with the new NPPF, provided the ‘old’ policies stem from no later than 2004. 

A number of us who have struggled with the absurdities of ‘One App’ validation requirements will perhaps take heart from the idea that validation lists should be frequently reviewed and that LPA’s should only request information that is relevant, necessary and material to the application. I wonder if that means I don’t have to procure the Air Quality Report sought for a proposed leisure development built just above the high tide mark up the coast from here?

I was pleased to see the continued reference to LPA’s looking for ‘solutions rather than problems’ and the continued emphasis on approval of sustainable developments wherever possible. However from past experience I shudder to think how we are going to get to grips with measuring  and assessing sustainability.

There is interesting and positive clarity on the greater emphasis given to assessing viability and it is interesting to note the reference to mitigation taking into account the need for competitive returns to a willing landowner and willing developer. Now all we need to do is to work out how to use the HCA’s assessment tool and we have got it cracked!

I was also struck by the new definition of Veteran Tree defined because of its great age, size or condition.  This got me thinking to the prospect of a Veteran Planner defined because of its age and circumference…..I certainly think I qualify on both fronts!

I’m sure that as I continue to plough through the guidance there will be more interesting nuggets of new information to delight and frustrate us in equal measure so I’ll keep you all posted with my thoughts.

120327NPPF

The NPPF is published

By on March 27, 2012 in Localism, NPPF, Planning Policy

The long awaited National Planing Policy Framework has been published. You can view the document here, or check back soon for detailed analysis.

120220CrowAppeal

Appeal won with costs

By on February 20, 2012 in Appeals, Prism News

Following on from our work with Kirklevington Riding Centre, Prism Planning have secured permission at appeal for a new house at Crows Meadow Farm, off Dalton Back Lane, Dalton Piercy, near Hartlepool.

The Planning Inspectorate granted the appeal and awarded full costs against the Council for what was agreed to have been an unnecessary appeal which has delayed the construction of a house on the site for no clear reason.

Our Clients had been operating a successful riding centre from the site for over three years. The business offers full and ‘part-time’ DIY livery services for horse owners in the local area. During this time, the family have lived on site in a mobile home, which was granted a temporary permission in 2007. Having demonstrated the viability of the business over the intervening period, Prism Planning submitted a planning application for a permanent house on the site in May 2011.

The business could successfully show a need for someone to live on site and be available to look after the horses; the proposed house complied with all relevant local and national planning policy. Despite this, the application was still undecided 5 months later with no positive end in sight.

The Councils officers ignored several pieces of key national policy during the consideration of the application and considered trying to impose legal agreements on the proposals which were wholly improper. Due to the delay, and position the Council adopted, an appeal against the Council’s failure to determine the application was submitted by Prism Planning and a hearing was later held at the Council offices in January 2012. In allowing the appeal, the Inspector found the Council to be “unreasonable” in their behaviour and “unreasonable” for not determining the application within the usual timescale.

Whilst we always try to have a productive relationship with the Councils we work with, there are times when the only way forward is to appeal. When we appeal we aim to win and this is a result that we are very proud of and adds to our impressive success rate. This is the second equestrian dwelling we have won at appeal in the last few months and shows that our in depth knowledge reaps benefit for the client. It is of course disappointing that taxpayers money was needlessly spent opposing such a sound case where there was no practical reason for the delay.

Our case studies pages will be updated soon…

120126PlanningSpeed

Getting your applications through the system quick

By on January 26, 2012 in Development Control

If you are looking to make a ‘minor’ application, for a small scale development it really does pay to make sure that the application is as complete and throrough as possible before submitting it.

Many Planning Authorities in the North East of England are imposing strict time limits to allow them to meet their Government imposed targets, particularly for applications with an 8-week determination target that are delegated to the Planning Officer for decision – these are applications where a decision can be reached without going before the Council’s Planning Committee.

These time limits can mean that applications need to be withdrawn, or worse are refused by the Council, where information is incomplete or when issues arise requiring further attention and resolution would take the application beyond the 8-week target.

This can seem unfair given the huge amount of work which needs to be undertaken and often doesn’t even guarantee a successful outcome.  Indeed, withdrawing an application to avoid refusal (refusal is nearly always better avoided if possible), preparing the additional information and then re-submitting can mean that an application that should take 8 weeks to approve can take 18-20 weeks!

It really does pay to get advice before you start and to make sure that you are providing the planning authority will all of the information that they might reasonably require to properly consider your application.  We offer free consultations and will always let you know what we think of your chances, good or bad.

We like talking to you

By on November 1, 2011 in Development Control, Prism News, Public Consultation

You may have seen in our recent newsletter that we received some press coverage for our public consultation event at Allens West. A public consultation is a chance for plans to go on show for a proposed project which has not yet gone to planning committee. Local residents can come along to the event, usually held all day with no booking required, and speak to our team of planners about what exactly is involved in the development.

Speaking to the public about proposed planning applications is something we value at Prism and take great pride in. We try to never submit a major application without ensuring that everyone is as informed as they can possibly be – because without all the information, you can’t make an informed decision!

Often a well attended consultation gives us a feel for what the general opinion is of the plans, and what aspects we may need to reassure people on. After speaking to our planning team and looking over detailed plans people feel ‘in the loop’ and assured that our plans have their best interests at heart.

Prism like talking to you, and if you need to talk to us about a planning issue you have please call 01325 345 960.

A window of opportunity for ‘marginal’ planning applications

By on October 17, 2011 in Development Control, NPPF, Planning Policy

The consultation for the draft National Planning Policy Framework has ended today and here at Prism we think this provides a window of opportunity for those of you with development projects. While the draft stands, and it is as yet unclear how quickly changes may be made, some marginal projects which may have previously been refused, or not been viable could now have a good chance.

This is by no means because it is, as it has been dubbed by doubters, a ‘developer’s charter’. It is because of the positive move towards a presumption in favour of sustainable development, along with changes to policy pushing the threshold for the Council’s housing supply past the 20% mark already approved.

At Prism we are already working on an application which may not have been approved previously but which has a good chance of succeeding in the present climate and we have plenty of advice and expertise to share. If you think your planning application might benefit from this window of opportunity and want to find out if it meets the criteria of the draft NPPF please contact us. We are great at problem solving and always find a solution that suits our clients, so why not take this opportunity to move forward with your development plans and get advice from the Prism team?

You can call us on: 01325 345 960 or email: admin@prism-planning.com

New Year, New Challenges

By on January 4, 2011 in Localism, Prism News

Day 1 of the New Year and my first work resolution kept so far -must blog more regularlyand must address the comments that have been received to previous postings. Resolution number 2 about de-cluttering my desk can wait a while…..it doesn’t do to rush these things!

As I write this blog, the office are reviewing the objectors to a planning application we have in for a social housing scheme in a nearby town.  The site is a brownfield one with a series of derelict industrial buildings on it. The site is allocated for housing in the Local Plan.  Notwithstanding this, over 40 local residents backing on to the site have written in to object to the scheme and we have been warned by officers at the Council that we will face a hostile and difficult time at the forthcoming planning meeting.  It seems that its OK to have housing for those in need -as long as they are in a different part of the town where they wont have quite so much impact upon local property values.

In itself this isn’t anything new and hardened planning consultants are no strangers to the odd bit of controversy. Our application is supported by officers after a protracted battle with the highway engineers who have denied ever having supported the allocation of the site in the first place.  If members have confidence in their own officers and truly believe in a plan led system then we might just get a permission.   However I can’t help be concerned that after the launch of the Localism Bill and all the discussions about empowering communities to take their own decisions, there is a good chance that the application will be refused.  I’m sure the grounds will be dressed up to allude to some sort of policy conflict rather than simply because local residents don’t want it -but we all know what the real motivating factors will have been.

As we enter the brave new world of localism, whatever that will come to mean, a lot of planning consultancies as well as a fair number of planning officers I suspect, are looking on with a significant degree of fear and alarm that local communities will be looking to use the new powers they seem set to inherit to resist development and maintain their status quo. The theory of localism is very sound and its difficult to argue against its merits from an idlealistic perspective. However when has theory ever worked in practice?

If any proponent of localism is able to explain to me how a local community might vote for their status quo to be disturbed, I would love to hear from you -but please be prepared to explain with concrete examples not abstract theories.  For the moment I remain an ardent sceptic of the road we seem to be embarking upon. If our permission is granted, I might be prepared to admit the concept has some possibilities but I need a lot of convincing.

Now, back to de-cluttering the desk…….!