ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT
CONTROL COMMITTEE
TUESDAY 15 MARCH 2005
Officer: Chris Hougham, Development Control Manager Tel: (01983) 823567
To draw Members attention to proposed changes in the
development control system and the D C Managers response to the relevant
consultation paper.
Background
In October 2003 a consultation document was published giving
some details of the Government’s Planning Reform Agenda. The document contains
suggested amendments to the GDPO and additional guidance relating to provisions
now contained in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. As a result of
discussions in Parliament during the passage of the Bill and the consultation
exercise, a number of changes are being made and it was considered that it
would be necessary to re-consult on the revised proposals.
The ODPM has now published a consultation paper on the first
part of this re-consultation which covers the following issues:
It is envisaged that a second consultation exercise will
deal with Local Development Orders, Mezzanines, Outline Planning Permission and
Reserved Matters, Design and Access Statements, Standard Application Forms,
Criteria for Consulting Statutory Consultees and Major Application
Determinations.
These new powers are intended to
inhibit the use of repeated applications that are submitted with the intention
of, over time, reducing opposition to undesirable developments. They are not
intended to prevent the submission of a similar application which has been
altered in order to address objections to the previous application.
Under Circular 14/91 Local Planning Authorities
already have the power to decline to determine an application for planning
permission which was the same or substantially the same as an application,
which, within the previous two years, the Secretary of State had called in and
refused or had been dismissed on appeal.
Section 43 of the new Act extends
this power by allowing a local planning authority to decline to determine an
application which is similar to one refused by the authority within the
preceding two years.
Section 51 of the new Act introduces
new powers which reduce the period of validity of a detailed planning
permission, a Listed Building Consent and a Conservation Area Consent from five
to three years. Authorities may still direct longer or shorter periods where
this would be appropriate and it is recommended they be flexible in their
dealings with applicants designating periods appropriate to the size and nature
of the development.
Additionally, the powers remove the
scope to begin development within five years of the grant of outline consent,
since this might have allowed a longer duration of consent than would be
provided under an application for full planning. It will also prevent an
extension to the agreed period of validity without the submission of a new
application.
The three year default period has
been introduced to encourage development to take place at an early stage and
its considered that, for the majority of planning permissions, three years
gives the developer long enough to implement the consent.
An amendment to the GDPO will
require statutory consultees to respond to consultation within a set time
period as required by Section 54 of the new Act. The Secretary of State is also
empowered to require statutory consultees to submit a report to him on their
performance against the statutory deadline. A further amendment to the GDPO
sets the time period at 21 days.
Schedule 6 of the new Act introduces
provision for regional planning bodies to be statutory consultees on certain
planning applications.
The Regional Planning Body will be
consulted on any development which would be of major importance for the
implementation of the Regional Spatial Strategy or a relevant regional policy,
because of its scale or nature of the location of the land.
It is not expected that there will
be significant numbers of applications on which the Regional Planning Body will
wish to be consulted.
Section 44 of the new Act amends the
Planning Act which will require the preparation of an Economic Impact Report
(EIR) in relation to applications for major infrastructure projects referred to
the Secretary of State.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister requires all responses
to be submitted on or before 22 February 2005.
Financial Implications
None
|
Options To note the action taken by Planning Officers who have
decline to respond to the consultation on the basis that the proposed changes
to the development control system are considered to be reasonable and
sustainable. |
Conclusions
This consultation paper deals with five specific issues which
have featured in proposed changes to the development control system for a
considerable period of time. The amendments to four of these changes appear to
be entirely reasonable and, in local terms, will only have a very minimal
impact on the development control process although hopefully, they will improve
efficiency when handling major applications.
In terms of the power to decline to determine applications
it has been suggested by the Enforcement Team Leader that Members may like to
consider making representations to the ODPM to the effect that this power
should be extended to retrospective applications in respect of unauthorised
development/material change of use where there is a valid and served
enforcement notice. The decision to serve an enforcement notice is in effect a
determination by the Local Planning Authority to refuse planning permission.
Members are asked to give weight to the fact that one of the grounds of appeal
against an enforcement notice is effectively requires consideration of a deemed
application and invariably the submission of an application is merely a
delaying tactic on the part of the applicant.
|
RECOMMENDATION To request that
consideration be given to extending Section 43 of the new Act to include the ability
to decline to determine a retrospective application where there is already a
valid and served enforcement notice. To note the action
taken by Planning Officers who have declined to respond to the consultation
on the basis that the proposed changes to the development control system are
considered to be reasonable and sustainable. |
ANDREW ASHCROFT
Head of Planning
Services