tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post466865692800416239..comments2022-12-13T14:45:12.233+00:00Comments on Martin Goodall's Planning Law Blog: Proposed changes in the use of planning conditionsMartin H Goodallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07079479984296674469noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-5376255480146315802015-07-16T15:04:26.630+01:002015-07-16T15:04:26.630+01:00I’ve just received a planning permission with a fa...I’ve just received a planning permission with a fairly standard set of conditions attached.<br /><br />The ‘Conditions Precedent’ or ‘pre-start’ conditions, require the approval of details of ‘external facing materials’ and hard & soft landscaping.<br /><br />In this instance, short of planting Giant Hogweed or mature Sequoia, and cladding the elevation in asbestos tile, I doubt that there’s anything that we could submit that wouldn’t meet with Local Authority approval, which makes me wonder if this isn’t really just an exercise in extracting a bit more cash for the Christmas booze-up.passerbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07133499748098929618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-18430065489291648712014-08-15T13:39:47.131+01:002014-08-15T13:39:47.131+01:00Many applicants wish to provide minimum level of i...Many applicants wish to provide minimum level of information at applications stage as a refusal is possible and they want to minimise costs prior to receiving a decision. IF permission is granted, LPAs often have to apply many conditions to secure the level of information required to secure an acceptable development. This works for the developers as they do not have to expend the full cost of preparing all details until they have certainty that permission is granted. This approach seems reasonable.<br /><br />If we assume that some of the information LPAs require is necessary, then it either needs to be provided at application stage or secured by condition. If we move away from conditions then it will have to be supplied at application stage, which may be wasted expenditure if permission is refused. If LPAs do not have a remit to apply conditions they could end up refusing applications due to insufficient information being submitted.<br /><br />In regard to per-commencement conditions, is it really unreasonable to suggest that the details of a development are finalised before works commence? In my experience it is much more complicated and heated to try to agree details during a construction phase when timescales are tight.<br /><br />Conditions are hugely time consuming for LPA's to deal with. An application for the approval of details required by condition, with a nominal fee, can take much longer than the original planning application. LPAs do not get an easier ride by applying conditions!<br /><br />So just to be clear, the current system benefits developers who wish to delay the costs of providing full information until they can be sure permission is granted. These same developers can forget this at conditions stage when the burden of the conditions is blamed upon the LPA. Applicants have the power to minimise per-commencement conditions; just establish what will be required and submit it at application stage. Most LPAs apply requirements reasonably consistently and conditions to be applied are normally easy to predict.<br /><br />The streamlined system would be-<br /><br />1. Submit full information with the application.<br />2. Any conditions applied would then most likely be pre-occupation or regulatory.<br />3. Receive permission, crack on with the build, submit information as required during / after construction.<br /><br />No need for regulatory change, applicants just need to submit full information at application stage, or accept and acknowledge that their own strategy relies upon delaying as much costs as possible until conditions stage, and when they get to that point remember that their choice to not submit the information earlier has required the application of conditions. It's not rocket science, it's within the applicant's control.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-49019823625544519382014-08-15T09:50:39.366+01:002014-08-15T09:50:39.366+01:00I used to work for and LPA and our policy was to n...I used to work for and LPA and our policy was to not accept samples of materials at the office (as Martin says, they often end up cluttering up the work space!) but to pop out to site to see them. This worked well and allowed one to judge the appropriateness of the samples to their context. Especially important in conservation areas and for listed buildings. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-91644574914902078052014-08-14T16:24:23.253+01:002014-08-14T16:24:23.253+01:00In answer to EMB (10/8/14) - Approval of materials...In answer to EMB (10/8/14) - Approval of materials is very frequently required by condition, even when it is not really necessary. LPAs certainly do receive numerous samples of bricks, tiles and other materials, and they often lie around in the office cluttering up planning officers’ working space! Such samples are often delivered to Planning reception by hand, rather than through the post – which would be too expensive. I see no difficulty with this, provided the samples are clearly labelled with the application number.Martin H Goodallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07079479984296674469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-59535336146976183112014-08-11T17:24:33.930+01:002014-08-11T17:24:33.930+01:00Four of the tests are definitely legal tests, as l...Four of the tests are definitely <i>legal</i> tests, as laid down by the Courts. The tests of ‘necessity’ and ‘enforceability’, however, are ministerially applied tests. Nevertheless it is firm ministerial policy that all six tests must be satisfied, failing which they are liable to be struck down. In some cases, this may raise difficulties as to their severability. If a condition that is held not to meet one or more of the six tests is not in fact severable, it will take down the permission with it.Martin H Goodallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07079479984296674469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-23477201701078407302014-08-10T22:30:41.801+01:002014-08-10T22:30:41.801+01:00Martin - for clarification - the oft-repeated six ...Martin - for clarification - the oft-repeated six tests are not of legality but policy tests.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-22626963753622453942014-08-10T11:49:22.995+01:002014-08-10T11:49:22.995+01:00Recently in an Appeal, an LPA asked the Inspector,...Recently in an Appeal, an LPA asked the Inspector, if allowing the Appeal and granting permission, to impose a condition requiring the developer to submit samples of all "materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces," and obtain its approval before starting. Many such details were of course shown on the drawings anyway, eg "to match existing." I submitted to the Inspector that the LPA should not have a second bite of the cherry, and I think especially so given its opposition to the development in principle. Also does their Receptionist have the ability to receive samples of stone, slate, lime etc.? I'd like someone to say if people really do deliver these kind of samples to Planning Departments!EMBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10104352206329768474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8170718846507476773.post-227442596470787002014-08-08T15:18:01.236+01:002014-08-08T15:18:01.236+01:00I have to say the tone of this post assumes that a...I have to say the tone of this post assumes that all developers come to the table fully prepared.<br /><br />In my experience, the only way LPAs can approve applications within the statutory time limits given the haphazard applications received and the political pressure applicants are well versed in applying, is through use of pre commencement conditions.<br /><br />I do however agree that it is not an ideal scenario. Perhaps a more balanced approach would be to strengthen the ability to reject clearly inadequate proposals (rather than the "validation appeal" power which swings things back in the developers favour again) and formulate a quicker, simpler injunction procedure for those applicants who simply ignore genuine pre commencement conditions.<br /><br />It is by no means a one way blame game.Matt Evansnoreply@blogger.com