OFFICERS’ REPORTS TO
SPECIAL COMBINED MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEES –
10 APRIL 2008
Each report for decision on this Agenda shows the Officer responsible, the recommendation
of the Head of Planning and Building Control and in the case of private business the
paragraph(s) of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 under which it is
considered exempt. None of the reports have financial, legal or policy implications save
where indicated.
PUBLIC BUSINESS - ITEM FOR DECISION
1.
Adoption of North Norfolk Core Strategy and Arrangements for Handling
Planning Applications
To advise Members of the likely timetable for adoption of the Local Development
Framework Core Strategy and to agree the process for determining planning
applications which are ‘on hand’ on the date of its approval.
Purpose
This report outlines the likely timetable for adoption of the North Norfolk Core
Strategy and recommends an approach to the determination of planning applications
to ensure a smooth transition from current Local Plan policies to the replacement
Core Strategy policies.
Background
The public hearing sessions in relation to the Core Strategy finished on 18 January
2008. The examination phase of plan preparation remains open until the Inspector
delivers his binding report and it is possible for the Inspector to require that the Local
Authority undertakes additional consultation in respect of particular issues or reopens the hearing sessions to allow further submissions to be heard.
The Inspector has indicated that his binding report will be sent to the Council towards
the end of May and Officers consider that it is now unlikely that additional
consultation will be required. The Council will initially receive a draft report for ‘fact
checking’. The regulations require that this fact check must be completed within two
weeks, during which time the Inspector’s report is not publicly available. Once any
factual changes have been made the Inspector will send a final binding report
following which the Authority must adopt the Core Strategy as soon as it is
practicable to do so. Therefore, unless there are substantial factual errors it is likely
that the Authority will be in receipt of the final binding report by the end of June/early
July.
It is anticipated that there is likely to be a short delay prior to formal adoption of the
plan to allow for:
•
•
•
Production of final documents incorporating any amendments recommended by
the Inspector or as a result of the factual check including final drafting of the
Proposals Maps.
Publication of an Adoption Statement (required by regulations).
Publication of a final Sustainability Appraisal report (required by regulations).
Contingent upon receipt of the Inspector’s binding report at the end of May and a
decision that the plan is sound without the need to make significant changes, it is
currently timetabled that final documentation will be produced to allow for formal
adoption of the Core Strategy by full Council at the end of July. Up until this date the
North Norfolk Local Plan remains the adopted Development Plan for the District.
Special Combined Meeting of the
Development Control Committees
1
10 April 2008
Determination of Planning Applications.
When Planning Authorities are preparing new policy documents that will replace
existing plans they may wish to take into account their emerging policies before they
are finally adopted. The advice from Government is that policies in emerging Core
Strategies can be taken into account when making decisions on planning
applications, and that these new policies should be weighed in the balance alongside
existing adopted policies and other ‘material’ considerations. The weight to be
afforded to new policies increases as the plan reaches specific stages in the
production process.
North Norfolk’s Core Strategy is now reaching the later stages of production. Upon
receipt of the final binding report the plan will have been found to be sound
(assuming a favourable decision), and cannot be amended further by either the
Inspector or the Planning Authority. At this stage the Planning Authority has the
opportunity to seek clarification from the Inspector in relation to his conclusions but is
bound to accept the overall findings of the report and adopt the plan. In light of this,
once the final binding report has been received, officers consider that the Core
Strategy should be afforded sufficient weight to supersede the policies of adopted
North Norfolk Local Plan.
The draft timetable would be as follows:
Date
End of May
Action
First draft report received from government
office for factual check.
Respond to draft report if necessary and
make changes to final documentation.
Receipt of final binding report from
government office at which point the Core
Strategy would be afforded sufficient
weight to outweigh the North Norfolk Local
Plan.
Core Strategy formally adopted by Full
Council.
June
Mid June/early July
July 30th
It is necessary to agree a formal procedure stating how the Council intends to
process planning applications which are ‘on hand’ (undetermined) on the date that
the Core Strategy supersedes the Local Plan. Some applications may have been
with the Council to consider for some months before the date of decision and these
applications will be at various stages in the determination process. At any one time
there are approximately 400 undetermined planning applications and around 25% of
these will have been with the Council for longer than 13 weeks. The Council may, for
example, have undetermined applications for the erection of dwellings in villages
which comply with current Local Plan policies but would not be in accordance with
the Core Strategy, and such applications may have been in the system for some
time, perhaps awaiting a flood risk assessment or other information necessary to
reach a decision. In some cases the Council may have resolved to grant planning
permission subject to receipt of satisfactory additional information or the completion
of a legal agreement. In such cases the question arises – would it be reasonable to
determine the application under Core Strategy policies and refuse permission when
there was previously an expectation that the application would be assessed against
the provisions of the Local Plan and granted permission?
Special Combined Meeting of the
Development Control Committees
2
10 April 2008
Once the Core Strategy has been adopted it will comprise part of the approved
development plan, along with saved Structure Plan policies and the Regional Spatial
Strategy. The Planning Acts (Section 38(6) Planning and Compensation Act) require
that decisions should be reached in accordance with it, unless ‘material
considerations’ suggest otherwise. A wide range of considerations are capable, in
principle, of being material to the decision.
Material considerations must be genuine planning considerations, i.e. they must be
related to the purpose of planning legislation, which is to regulate the development
and use of land in the public interest. There is no specific advice relating to whether
the timing of an application would normally be regarded as a ‘material consideration’.
As a general rule it is considered that an applicant should not normally be able to rely
on an argument that an application was made at an earlier date when different
policies were applicable and the outcome on an application may have been different.
The timing of an application is essentially a matter of process and is not directly
related to the use of land.
It is therefore considered that there should be a strong presumption that decisions
will be reached in accordance with the new policies once they are adopted. However,
there may be exceptional circumstances where the planning history of the site and
the status of the application would justify a departure from the Core Strategy and
there will be a period following receipt of the binding report, and prior to formal
adoption of the Core Strategy, when the Local Plan will continue to comprise part of
the adopted Development Plan.
Officers consider that during this period, and for a short time after adoption of the
Core Strategy it may be ‘reasonable and fair’ to continue to grant permission in some
exceptional circumstances notwithstanding that such a permission may be contrary
to Core Strategy policies. Much would depend on the nature of the departure from
the Core Strategy and the planning history related to the particular proposal and
would need to be judged on a case-by-case basis. For example, if the Council has
resolved to grant planning permission but the decision notice had not yet been
issued, it would arguably be unreasonable to revisit, and potential reverse, the earlier
resolution.
Officers consider that such an approach could be justified in terms of the right to a
‘fair’ civil determination under the provisions of Article 6 of Schedule 1 of the Human
Rights Act 1998.
Since the majority of undetermined applications will accord with the both the Local
Plan and the Core Strategy it is not considered that this approach will impact on
many proposals.
RECOMMENDATION:That the Committee endorses the following:
1. Applications determined prior to receipt of the final binding report will be
determined in accordance with the Local Plan with an appropriate degree of
weight attached to the Core Strategy as a material consideration.
2. All applications submitted after receipt of the final binding report will be
determined in accordance with the policies of the Core Strategy unless there
are material considerations that would suggest otherwise.
Special Combined Meeting of the
Development Control Committees
3
10 April 2008
3. For all applications ‘on hand’ upon receipt of the final binding report there
will be presumption that they will be determined in accordance with the Core
Strategy although for a short time some weight will continue to be attached to
the Local Plan where in the Council’s opinion this is justified by the provisions
of Article 6 of schedule 1 of the Human Rights Act (the right to a fair civil
determination).
Source: (Mark Ashwell, Ext 6325 – File Reference: LDF Core Strategy)
PUBLIC BUSINESS - ITEM FOR DECISION
2.
Validation procedures for the new standard national planning application
forms – adoption of a list of local requirements for North Norfolk District
Council
Report following consultation on a ‘local list’ of requirements to accompany the
newly introduced standard planning application forms. Recommended changes for
adoption of the local list
Background
Members will recall that identical reports were presented to the two Development
Control Committees in January explaining the introduction of the new standard
planning application forms and the Government’s introduction of a national list and a
local list of requirements for the purposes of validating applications. A copy of that
report (together with the original appendices) is attached in Appendix 1.
Legislation is being amended in relation to these requirements which is explained in
two recently published documents: The Validation of Planning Applications –
Guidance for local planning authorities (DCLG – December 2007); and DCLG
Circular 02/2008 - Standard Application Forms and Validation.
As previously explained, one of the main purposes of these requirements is to
provide clarity and guidance to developers from the outset as to what detail and
information is required to accompany applications. This should provide for more
consistency in the content of applications and allow local planning authorities to have
all the necessary information to make speedier and better informed decisions.
The national standard planning application forms become mandatory on 6 April this
year. From that date new applications will be assessed against the national
requirements. These requirements relate to the proper completion of application
forms and certificates, the correct fee, adequacy of plans, and where required a
design and access statement. Applications which are judged not to meet these
requirements will not be registered until they have been corrected.
Once a local planning authority adopts its local list of requirements (and publishes it
on its website), then similarly the authority can decline to register an application if it is
not satisfied that the necessary details specified on its local list have been submitted.
At the respective Development Control Committee meetings in January it was agreed
that the local list of requirements presented to Members should be the subject of a
six week consultation exercise. Members requested that in addition to those bodies
referred to in the report, the Norfolk Wildlife Trust, Norfolk Coast Partnership, Norfolk
Landscape Archaeology and the Civic Trust also be consulted.
Special Combined Meeting of the
Development Control Committees
4
10 April 2008
The Consultation Process
The six week consultation period ended on 25 February. Written responses were
received from the following bodies:
Environment Agency
Norfolk County Council (Planning and Transportation)
Natural England
Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership
Norfolk Wildlife Trust
Norfolk Landscape Archaeology
Norfolk CPRE
The local list was discussed at the North Norfolk Agents’ Group meeting on 22
January 2008. All local agents on the Council’s database were written to with copies
of the list and the January Development Control Committee report, with the invitation
to make comment. One written response has been received from Bidwells of
Norwich.
Detailed comments have also been received from the Council’s Planning Policy
Manager and Conservation, Design and Landscape Manager.
Copies of the responses received from the bodies mentioned above and Bidwells are
attached in Appendix 2.
Analysis of Responses
First and foremost, no objections have been received to any of the 20 different
requirements proposed in the local list. The Government has actually provided a list
of 28 types of local requirements which local planning authorities may select from,
dependent upon local circumstances. The previous Committee reports gave reasons
why certain of these requirements were not considered necessary for inclusion in this
Council’s local list. Two additional requirements were included, namely an energy
consumption statement and a sustainable construction checklist.
Suggestions have been made for the inclusion of additional local requirements
referred to in the Government list. The contents of these suggestions are
summarised below together with the officer recommendation.
Bidwells and Norfolk CPRE have advocated the inclusion of a Planning Statement
to accompany major applications where there is a need to bring together all technical
supporting information into a combined document. The Government states the
purpose of a Planning Statement as being to “identify the context and need for a
proposed development and includes an assessment of how the proposed
development accords with relevant national, regional and local planning policies. It
may also include details of consultations with the Local Planning Authority and wider
community/statutory consultees undertaken prior to submission”.
It is
recommended that a Planning Statement is included in the Council’s local list.
Norfolk CPRE have argued the need for an Open Space Assessment. The
Government makes it clear that this relates to development proposals within existing
open spaces (e.g. playing fields) as opposed to proposed open space in new
development. Unlike larger urban authorities this is not considered to be a significant
issue for this District. It is not recommended that an Open Space Assessment is
included in the Council’s local list.
Special Combined Meeting of the
Development Control Committees
5
10 April 2008
Norfolk CPRE have argued for the need of an Economic Statement. Such a
statement is intended to refer to any regeneration benefits of proposed developments
including details of new jobs, floorspace totals and any community benefits. It was
previously considered by officers that such a requirement is aimed at larger urban
regeneration projects than those which occur in this District. Nevertheless there will
be on occasion applications which will benefit from such an assessment. It is
recommended that an Economic Statement is included in the Council’s local list.
Norfolk CPRE have argued for the need for Landscaping Details, in particular a
statement on long-term management. This was previously omitted from the list
because it was felt by officers that such details would normally be indicated on
submitted plans. However it is agreed, that particularly on large development
schemes, there will be a need to secure the long-term management and
maintenance of landscaping. It is recommended that a Landscaping Details
requirement is included in the Council’s local list.
Amongst the list of previously recommended local requirements is a Biodiversity
Survey and Report. The need for such a report is considered necessary where a
proposed development (in the Government’s words) “may have possible impacts on
wildlife and biodiversity”. Development proposals which could affect protected
species, habitat sites, biodiversity features and those of geological importance would
come within this definition. This topic has generated by far the most response of all
the suggested local requirements.
It has received unanimous support, but
representations have been made advocating that more application types should be
subject to the requirement and greater clarity should be provided as to in what
circumstances such a report would be expected.
The suggestion has been made in several responses that a Biodiversity Survey and
Report should be one of the requirements which may be required in the case of
applications for Lawful Development Certificates, Prior Notification/Approval and for
tree works. The Government, however, in its guidance document specifies what
local requirements may be required for each different type of application. A
Biodiversity Survey and Report is not included in the case of these types if
application. Applications for Lawful Development Certificates can only be assessed
on matters of fact relating to planning law and not other issues. Circular 02/2008 has
now clarified that applications for Prior Notification/Approval are not subject to the
new provisions on the validation of applications. Neither are applications for tree
works until clarification is provided by amendments to the Town and Country
Planning (Trees) Regulations 1999.
Appended with the previous January Committee reports was a table indicating for
each standard application type which local requirement would, may and would not be
required. Also included was a list of guidance notes aimed at providing advice to
applicants as to the circumstances when each particular local requirement would be
expected to accompany an application. In the light of the consultation comments
now received it is acknowledged that these guidance notes need to be made more
specific, particularly in the case of a Biodiversity Survey and Report. In this respect
the guidance notes will be amended to refer applicants to the very specific advice
contained in the North Norfolk Local Requirements for Protected Species Survey and
the North Norfolk Local Requirements for Designated Sites, Priority Habitats and
other significant features. Copies of these are attached in Appendix 3.
Of the remainder of responses received these refer primarily to suggested
amendments to the guidance notes and suggestions for additional requirements
being applicable to certain types of application other than that indicated in the local
Special Combined Meeting of the
Development Control Committees
6
10 April 2008
requirements checklist table. Issues raised in the response from Norfolk County
Highways are being taken up on a county-wide level through the Norfolk
Development Control Officers Group.
Summary and Recommendations
The consultation exercise has generated some valuable responses and has resulted
in officers recommending additional local requirements to the Council’s local list as
well as recognising that there needs to be greater clarification provided in the
accompanying guidance notes. Further work needs to be done finalising the wording
and format of the guidance notes. Furthermore whilst the originally prepared
checklist table served a useful purpose in identifying which local requirements apply
to which types of application, it is not particularly user-friendly. The standard
application forms are already on the Council’s website. The intention is that for each
application form there will be links to the national and local requirements which
specifically apply to the application type. There will be an additional link to the
revised guidance notes. Similar documentation will be provided in paper form.
It is therefore recommended that the Committee agrees to the following
requirements and further progress, prior to formal adoption of the Council’s local list:1) That the local list includes the following requirements:Affordable Housing Statement
Biodiversity Survey and Report
Economic Statement
Environmental Statement
Flood Risk Assessment
Foul Sewerage and Utilities Assessment
Heritage Statement
Land Contamination Assessment
Landscaping Details
Lighting Assessment
Noise Assessment
Photographs
Section 106 Obligations (Draft Heads of Terms)
Planning Statement
Statement of Community Involvement
Structural Survey
Telecommunications Development – Supplementary Information
Town Centre/Retail Impact Assessment
Transport Assessment and Travel Plan
Tree Survey/Arboricultural Implications
Ventilation/Extraction Statement
Energy Consumption Checklist
Sustainable Construction Checklist
2) That officers review the local requirements which are applicable to each standard
application form in the light of representations received, but in accordance with
that referred to in the Validation of Planning Applications – Guidance for local
planning authorities – DCLG December 2007.
3) That officers review and amend the content and format of the guidance notes to
accompany the local list taking into account the representations referred to
above.
Special Combined Meeting of the
Development Control Committees
7
10 April 2008
The intention is to ‘go live’ with the local requirements to coincide with the anticipated
formal adoption of the LDF Core Strategy in early summer.
Members should be aware that this new process of validation will involve increased
professional and technical officer time. Presently most new applications are
validated on the day of receipt. Circular 02/200 states that most minor and smallscale applications should be validated within 3 - 5 working days and major
applications within 10 working days of receipt. Officers are confident that this
authority will validate applications considerably quicker than these timescales, but
nevertheless the process is unlikely to be as quick as present. Furthermore, there is
likely to be more demand of officers at the pre-application stage to clarify what local
requirements will be needed to accompany an application. This raises the need for
consistency of advice.
As with all procedures of this type, an element of discretion and common sense will
need to be applied in the validation process. Circular 02/2008 states that where an
application lacks the necessary information the authority will in general be entitled to
invalidate the application, and so decline to determine it.
A further important point to note is that Circular 02/2007 makes it clear that the
quality of information submitted should have no bearing on the validation process,
but that that should be assessed during the determination process.
Inevitably there will be instances when further details will be required once an
application has been registered, but it is hoped that these occasions will be
considerably less frequent than at present.
Finally, Members should note that the Government’s guidance stipulates that
authorities should review their local lists every three years. There will therefore be
the opportunity to assess the effectiveness of the proposed list in 2011.
RECOMMENDATION:That the Committee agrees to adopt a local list for North Norfolk on the basis
of that referred to in the Summary and Recommendations section of this
report.
Source: (John Williams, Ext 6063 File Reference: one app 10 April)
Special Combined Meeting of the
Development Control Committees
8
10 April 2008