Showing posts with label london planning consultants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label london planning consultants. Show all posts

An Appeal Court challenge has been heard against the government's overhaul of planning rules for houses in multiple occupation (HMOs).

The policy, which was introduced last year by housing minister Grant Shapps, means that planning permission is no longer needed to turn single houses into HMOs.
It was challenged at the High Court in April, by councils from Milton Keynes, Oxford and Newcastle, which complained that they had not been properly consulted about the new regulations.
The authorities claimed that HMOs cause difficulties for residents, including extra traffic, and increased crime and anti-social behaviour.
Their claim was rejected by Judge Sir Michael Harrison, who said there was no unfairness to the councils in the consultation process, as it came just a year after a wider consultation on HMOs by the previous government.
Milton Keynes Council, with the backing of a number of councils across the country, today took their fight to the Appeal Court, in a fresh bid to have the policy overturned.
Lawyers for the council told the court that the authority and local residents have suffered problems caused by HMOs for many years, including increased littering and anti-social behaviour.
Timothy Mould QC said Milton Keynes had the support of councils "up and down the country" in bringing the challenge against communities secretary, Eric Pickles, whose office approved the policy.
The barrister said the support was from "urban" councils, including Leeds, Charnwood, Nottingham, Bristol and Torbay, rather than from rural areas - where HMOs are not as big an issue.
The court heard that, following a consultation in 2009 - in which every council was involved - the Labour government introduced regulations which meant planning permission was needed to convert houses into HMOs.
However, when the coalition government was formed, it was decided the policy should be reversed, in a bid to prevent would-be landlords being put off by the red tape involved in converting a house into flats or bedsits.
Mould said: "The government apparently formed the view that the legislation introduced in 2009 was an unjustifiable burden on those areas where HMO development was not a concern.
"It considered that the legislation deterred prospective landlords from entering the market and endangered low-cost housing in many areas."
There was a second consultation in June last year, but councils were only represented collectively by the Local Government Association, and were not asked directly for their views.
Mould told the court that the regulations were then changed so that planning permission wasn't needed to create HMOs - despite the fact this was the least popular option in the 2009 consultation, with just one per cent of the responses supporting it.
Milton Keynes Council contends that the exclusion of local councils from last year's consultation was "unfair and unreasonable".
The Appeal Court heard the council has in fact changed its own planning policy - so that permission from the authority is needed to convert a house into an HMO - but still faces the prospect of having to pay out compensation to landlords under the new regulations.
Lord Justice Pill, Lady Justice Arden and Lord Justice Macfarlane are expected to reserve giving their judgment on the case until a later date. (source: court reporter in PLANNING)

DCLG receives over 13,700 responses to NPPF consultation

Speaking yesterday during a debate in the House of Commons on the NPPF, Stunell said: "As of this morning, 13,700 responses have been received to the consultation, of which some 3,700 are substantive individual ones."

The consultation on the draft NPPF closed earlier this week. On Monday, the National Trust – one of the most vocal critics of the proposed reforms – handed over a petition containing more than 200,000 signatures calling on the government to make changes to the controversial document.

Speaking during yesterday’s debate, Stunell said: "Of all the thousands of comments that have been made about the NPPF so far, very few have challenged the importance of both the simplification and the localisation that we have set out." He refers to the size of the document which has been reduced from 1000 pages to just over 50.

Responding to a question from Labour MP Tristram Hunt, decentralisation minister Greg Clark told MPs that property developers "had no influence whatever on our draft policy framework".

Clark added that "transitional arrangements" would be put in place to help councils adapt to the reforms. These arrangements would inevitably cost the tax payer a fortune to implement.

Countryside campaigners have warned that the NPPF could result in a development free-for-all in areas without adopted local plans. It stipulates that councils should grant permission where the local plan is "absent, silent or indeterminate".

Clark said: "In the transitional arrangements we will put in place … we will be clear that no local council or authority that has developed a plan that expresses the future of its community will be at all disadvantaged.
This is truly hard to believe!

"We are not going to take decision making from them. Part of the transitional arrangements will ensure that the community is advantaged rather than disadvantaged from the outset."

Shadow communities secretary Hilary Benn accused the coalition government of approaching planning reform in a "ham-fisted" way.

He said: "The Government hope that planning reform will help growth to get going again, and we all want that.
"However, their actions in rushing reform in a way that has lost people’s confidence and hurrying to try to abolish the regional spatial strategies have led to uncertainty among planners, councils, developers and the courts. As a result, the system may slow down while everyone works out what the new words mean." Chaos as usual!
source: Jamie Carpenter