Sunday 2 December 2012

Flying the Flag - The New Planning Rules

High on the list of important changes to the planning system - almost ahead of major Infrastructure projects and the dearth of housebuilding - is the critical issue of flag flying. The Government have now published a Plain English Guide to what you can and cannot do with flags. 

This vital piece of planning legislation is a 'must-read' and can be downloaded here:

I really need to get a life.

Thursday 29 November 2012

It's a Boles Up!

Quote of the Day:

"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There's no point in being a damn fool about it." 
W.C.Fields

I couldn't have put it better myself, nor the excellent overview by Rebekah Paczek of the Government's latest Planning Antics. Read On...

"Just a week to go before the Autumn Statement – and yes, we are very excited about it, especially if it means we might get some movement on Empty Rates from within the bowels of George Osborne…  However, before that, the headlines today are just too much fun to miss!

It's a Boles Up!

Former Policy Exchange wonk turned Planning Minister, Nick Boles, is due to declare that we should build all over the UK.  He was quoted in an interview for Newsnight to be broadcast tonight saying "concrete it all; Bladerunner-style tower blocks and no natural light, that's what we're aiming for…"  Okay, so he didn't actually say that, nor, as far as we can make out, did he say that it was a "moral right" for people to own their own home (as Sky 'never wrong for long' has it on their website, although they also seem to have got confused about the difference between 3% and a third).  It does seem that he said it is a moral right for everyone to live in a decent home which I think is fair enough.  Although it may be that Sky don't see the subtly important difference between 'owning' somewhere and 'living' somewhere – reasserting the imperative for everyone to own their own home rather than rent would undermine the drive towards the PRS at the moment.  Objectively, it seems that Boles said that we need to recognise that building on a small percentage of currently undeveloped land would solve the housing crisis and would also leave us with huge amounts of undeveloped land to ramble across and enjoy.  So far, so uncontroversial, but then that's not a very exciting story is it…  Maybe we should all watch Newsnight tonight to see what he really said rather than what he is reported as saying.

Round and Round the Garden

In this case, Nick Clegg is the teddy bear, going round and round and finally he hit upon a novel idea – garden cities, that's it, the key to our recovery.  Thank goodness, all hail Nick Clegg.  Nobody had thought of that since, errr, wait – Eco Towns?  So apparently we are back on that little roundabout but without necessarily any further policy to substantiate it.

This week, the Government announced a consultation on extending the regime covering nationally significant infrastructure projects to business and commercial projects – although definitely not retail projects.  Apparently this is largely to prevent large complex projects being a drain on local authority resources and nothing to do with pushing through the growth agenda.  However, public consultation is key on such projects, which is a relief all round.  The definition of nationally significant is suitably vague – we could end up in another game of ping-pong over semantics with this one.

In Case You Missed It…

Yes, there has been a lot of to-ing and fro-ing on the planning agenda recently, so much so that we've become rather dizzy trying to keep track of it all but we've stopped spinning round in circles and thought now would be a good time to review what's actually happened over the past few weeks.

Planning consultants and developers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but those chains of planning constraints apparently…  Another week, another planning announcement.  This time it was David Cameron announcing at the CBI conference that the ability to launch a Judicial Review is to be subject to reform.  It has apparently only recently come to the attention of government that we tend to take around an additional ten years and X billion pounds to get our major infrastructure projects off the ground  compared to other countries and that, amazingly, this has an impact on our economy.  A fact that had never occurred to the rest of us.  Radio 4 had CPRE on air commenting that this should only be done if third party rights of appeal were to be introduced (rather misses the point), this argument was backed up by suggesting that developers use JR vexatiously and this is the problem, not community groups – of course, no developer would use third party rights of appeal vexatiously would they? 

So, you've all already read the Growth & Infrastructure Bill from cover to cover, you have, haven't you?  I got as far as the first clause which started off by stating that applicants can submit planning applications to PINs thereby bypassing local authorities  and had to stop for a little while to reflect on the successful implementation of Localism and handing power back to local communities and local authorities.  Once I managed to read on, it all seemed to make sense, but seems also to be adding many pages to the reduced planning policy.  Following this, we have now had a series of consultations published, which will presumably become guidance, which will presumably also tot up the number of pages.

Captain Pickles has been on the warpath, the target of his ire this time are those pesky under-performing local authorities – DOWN WITH HACKNEY he declared, before quickly realising he meant to say DOWN WITH HARINGEY, but he was so blinded with the warmth he clearly feels for Jules Pipe, Directly Elected Mayor of Hackney, that it was an inevitable Freudian Slip.  

So, in case you missed anything, here is the top ten in the planning charts:
  • The new Growth & Infrastructure Bill is introduced to Parliament – it suggests, amongst other things, that developers can bypass failing local authorities and apply for permission directly to PINs.  No definition of 'failing' at this stage.  Anyone who  was fooled into thinking that the Localism Bill actually gave away any real power can be firmly assured that any powers which may have been ceded are now firmly being taken back.  Basically, the Growth & Infrastructure Bill sets out to make local authorities delver what the government wants and if they refuse, the Government will take away the power they have and deliver it anyway.
  • Michael Heseltine emerged from under the big rock which the Tories have seemed to want to keep him under with 'No Stone Unturned', his plan for 'concrete' growth – it suggest, amongst other things, that LEPs should have more planning powers, be more structured and have a greater regional role.  Perhaps they should also be renamed RDAs and then we can do a calculation on how much money the government has spent abolishing something only to be replaced with the same structure – a bit like the Italian government back in the good old pre-Berlusconi days…  Heseltine and his report now appear to have been pushed back under the rock and George Osborne is using his copy of the report as a doorstop.
  • Lord Taylor is in charge or reviewing planning guidance – all 6,000 pages.  Most people would have thought that a good time to publish Guidance Notes for policy would be alongside the policy.  However, the government decided that it would be more interesting to publish the Guidance Notes around a year later by which point the new regime will have started to bed down so it can be nicely shaken up again.
  • The government is reviewing JR to make it easier to build big things – for some reason Cameron decided to bring attention to the JR process of the West Coast mainline decision as an example of when it is right to do so; why would you feel the need to draw attention to one of your biggest embarrassments so far??  Perhaps a pre-emptive strike?
  • The Government has started naming and shaming those naughty councils who just won't toe the line – Haringey is allegedly the worst, although Pickles made a Freudian Slip when he announced Hackney to be the worst performer.  Apparently K&C are also high on the list, although it may be less likely that they will be put into special measures…
  • Consultation on extending 'nationally significant infrastructure projects' to business and commercial projects as above
So that was only six but really, a top ten was a bit too much to dig up, much like the greenbelt…

In other exciting news, DCLG appear to have relaunched the website, what we now have is something which is harder to navigate, makes little logical sense and has seemingly been put together on the basis that you will probably give up looking for whatever it was you wanted before you find it.  Surely not??

We will be back with our review of the Autumn Statement next week and most definitely not going out for a Christmas lunch…"

Rebekah Paczek

snapdragonconsulting.co.uktwitter.com/bekspaczek

Friday 23 November 2012

Build it Bigger - Permitted development rights for homeowners & businesses


As heralded with much fanfare back in the summer the Government  propose to make it quick, easier and cheaper for homeowners to build small-scale single-storey  extensions and conservatories , while respecting the amenity of neighbours. Consultation on the proposed changes is open for comment until 24th December.

The aim is to bring extra work for local construction companies and small traders,  as families and businesses who were previously deterred by the planning process take forward their plans.

It is of course important to ensure that any impact on neighbours and communities is acceptable. For this reason, safeguards under planning and other regimes will remain in place, and the changes to permitted development rights for homeowners and businesses will not apply in protected areas such as conservation areas, National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Sites of Special Scientific Interest. These proposals do not remove the requirement for separate listed building consent. 
 
The Government is proposing action in five areas:

  • Increasing the size limits for the depth of single-storey domestic extensions from 4m to 8m (for detached houses) and from 3m to 6m (for all other houses), in non-protected areas, for a period of three years. No changes are proposed for extensions of more than one storey.

    To ensure that the amenity of neighbouring properties is protected, other limitations and conditions would remain the same. For example, development will not be able to cover more than 50% of the curtilage of the house, single-storey extensions must not exceed 4m in height, and any extensions which have an eaves height of greater than 3m must not be within 2m of the boundary. In addition, existing protections under other regimes (building regulations, the Party Wall Act or the ‘right to light’, for example) will continue to apply. There is no weakening of the National Planning Policy Framework policies which aim to prevent garden-grabbing.

  • Increasing the size limits for extensions to shop and professional/financial services establishments to 100m², and allowing the building of these extensions up to the boundary of the property (except where the boundary is with a residential property), in non-protected areas, for a period of three years.
  • Increasing the size limits for extensions to offices to 100m², in non-protected areas,  for a period of three years.
  • Increasing the size limits for new industrial buildings within the curtilage of existing  industrial premises to 200m², in non-protected areas, for a period of three years.
  • Removing some prior approval requirements for the installation of broadband infrastructure for a period of five years.

The Government also wish to explore whether there is scope to use permitted development to make it easier to carry out garage conversions.
Other changes to permitted development are also being taken forward separately:  making it easier for commercial properties to be converted to residential use; and encouraging the reuse of existing buildings through making changes of use easier.
If you’d like to comment on these proposals then do so before the 24th December. The link is here:

The New Planning Application Fees Rise 15%


The Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications, Deemed Applications, Requests and Site Visits) (England) Regulations 2012 became active yesterday  and introduced a 15% flat rate rise in planning application fees.

It will now cost you £172 for a domestic application involving alterations/extensions to a single dwelling, including works within the boundary.

Applications for removal or variation of a condition following grant of planning permission has gone up to £195 per condition - even more reason to bundle your application for conditions together as a single submission.

For the full Fees Schedule you can access it via my website News Section or directly HERE

The Regulations in full are HERE

Friday 16 November 2012

GOV.UK - Simpler, Clearer, Faster My Ar......

During my many years developing and running websites the overriding aim has been make sure that any visitors can get the information they require as quickly and as easily as possible. Sadly this simple premise is not being adopted by the new GOV.UK website which seems to delight in hiding information in obscure locations.

The previous Communities & Local Government website was a model of clarity in comparison. At least when you logged in to the planning section you could see all the relevant details in one place. Now, information appears to be distributed around the site in a format designed to obscure.

For example, the original 'Letters to Chief Planning Officer's' section (see previous blog) is now located under housing and local services planning officer guidance in a box at the bottom of the page entitled "Additional detailed guidance from Government Departments"

I'm reminded of that wonderful speech at the beginning of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy where Mr Prosser is advising Arthur Dent of the location of the planning application for the new bypass and he responds, "It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet, stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'beware of the leopard'. Ever thought of going into advertising?"

If you want individual Circulars or Regulations then you need to go via the search engine or the Publications pages to discover them individually. They do not appear to be listed as a group as previously. 

Ah ha I hear you say the search engine must be fantastic. Sadly not. In trying to find those wonderful letters to chief planning officer's I typed that into the search engine (and various combinations) to receive 147 results, none of which were relevant. Having by this time lost the will to live I reverted to Google and tripped over the new page accordingly.

Yes, yes, I know. Get a life!

The main GOV.UK page does not refer to planning at all. You'll need to go to Topics for that (scroll down to the bottom of the page in the grey area). The main planning page is now at:

...and don't forget to leave your browsing history live so that your back button can get you into previous searches as this is not available as a quick link on many of the sections.

If you do require access to any sort of planning information and prefer not to waste valuable breathing time chasing down documents within this new website then do check out my planning library at:

Planning Fees Go Up 15% on the 22nd November


"Planning" Magazine report that:

In July, the then planning minister Greg Clark announced "one-off adjustment to up-rate fees in line with inflation, amounting to around 15% since 2008". The announcement stopped short of previous consultation proposals to allow local authorities to set their own planning fees.

In a letter to chief planning officers this week, DCLG chief planner Steve Quartermain said the changes would come into force on 22 November.
Along with the rise, the letter said the department had "introduced a small number of new fees as a result of changes to primary legislation".

These include applications for urgent crown development and certificates of appropriate alternative development.

 The letter adds that an amendment has also been made to allow for fees in respect of deemed applications, relating to permitted development, "to be paid in full to the local planning authority rather than half to the local planning authority and half to the secretary of state. This does not change in anyway the fee to be paid, but it does mean that authorities will benefit from receiving the whole fee".

Sadly as I write the appalling new GOV.UK website does not have the letter available for reference yet but I will post this as and when it is available.

Friday 19 October 2012

Planning for Pubs – Policy Controls & Ideas for a New Future?


Cambridge City Council have just published their Interim Planning Policy Guidance on the Protection of Public Houses in the City of Cambridge” [1] the first in a new round of planning policy controls that aim to limit loss of these ‘community assets’ through redevelopment.

The traditional Pub has been in decline for some time, for a variety of reasons. Drink-driving laws, changes in drinking patterns, cheaper more accessible supermarket products, rising rent levels and significant tax duty have all done for the traditional market. Whether in rural or urban areas the UK alone is still losing 12 pub businesses a week to alternative uses. This much is known and is doubtless true for pubs, bars and similar enterprises the world over.

Keen to promote the Big Society and wider neighbourhood decision-making, the UK Government has sought to reduce this decline by imposing more rigorous planning policy in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF - paragraph 28 in particular). 

Simply stopping change is a sledgehammer approach and pre-supposes that the Pub will remain active in the absence of allowing a change of use. The plethora of decaying ‘for sale’ boards littering high street and village stand testament to this single-sided approach.

Drawing upon this guidance Cambridge’s interim policy requires that:

Development will only be permitted where evidence has been provided to satisfy the following criteria:

(a)    The pub has been marketed for 12 months as a public house free of tie and restrictive covenant and for alternative local commercial or community facility, at a price agreed with the Council following an independent professional valuation (paid for by the developer) and there has been no interest in either the free- or lease-hold either as a public house, restaurant or other use falling within the ‘A’ use classes or as a community facility falling within ‘D1’ use class; and

(b)    All reasonable efforts have been made to preserve the facility (including all diversification options explored – and evidence supplied to illustrate this) but it has been proven that it would not be economically viable to retain the building or site for its existing or any other ‘A’ or ‘D1’ class use; and

(c)    It has been otherwise demonstrated that the local community no longer needs the public house or any alternative ‘A’ or ‘D1’ class use and its loss would not damage the availability of local commercial or community facilities that provide for day-to-day needs in the local area.

This policy supports and encourages other commercial uses of the premises in line with the NPPF and existing Permitted Development Rights.

But here’s the irony. The ‘Pub’ as a community facility is not, of itself, protected by this policy approach. The use of the property for beneficial local employment/economic uses is the principle driver. 

There is no doubt the ‘Pub’ is identified as a key element in sustaining community cohesion and providing a sense of place, but there is just one problem. If the public at large are no longer interested in the traditional pub experience, what might be done to find a compatible function that retains the Pub, whilst at the same time making it a viable business?

Here are some thoughts.

There is an increasingly agile workforce out there who are willing and able – through technology – to work pretty much anywhere. The difficulty is finding somewhere suitable. The current economic climate is also making individuals and business alike think twice about that long and expensive commute. Employees have also been ‘released’ to discover alternative employment opportunities leading to more working from home.

In the same way as coffee chains have started to provide WiFi accessibility to bring people in through the door, some pub chains have begun the same process in order to attract the business sector. But this is just the start. Whilst such facilities may be helpful for that quick email catch-up, really working from a café or holding a business meeting is less successful.

The pub as a community ‘business’ hub must be a worthwhile consideration. Think, hotdesk, meets coworking and micro-meeting centre with food, drink and possibly accommodation too.

A report I prepared recently “Inn Business – A Diversification Opportunity” offers some valuable suggestions.

Lets try and keep pubs as 'pubs' - but with some additional income streams that can help them to survive.

[1] For the planning guidance in Cambridge go to:

Monday 15 October 2012

Flying the Flag and Planning




The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2012 came into force on 12 October 2012.

These regulations will increase the range of flags that can be displayed either without express consent or with deemed consent. The conditions and limitations on flags that can be displayed with deemed consent will also be relaxed in certain circumstances. 

Limitations remain for flags in Conservation Areas, any Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), a National Park, the Broads or an area of special [Advertisement]  control. 

A plain English guide is due for publication shortly.

The Regulations provide:

New paragraph 7AA gives deemed consent to the display of a flag from a single flagstaff projecting from any part of a building other than vertically from the roof (as paragraph 7A governs flags attached to flagstaffs projecting vertically from roofs). 

New paragraph 7AB gives deemed consent to flags flown from up to two flagstaffs on land within the curtilage of a building. 

Flag advertisements within these classes may not be displayed in a conservation area, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a National Park, the Broads or an area of special control. 

New paragraph 7AC gives deemed consent for the display of Blue Flag Award scheme flags from flagstaffs on beaches or in marinas. 

A new paragraph 7AD gives deemed consent to the display of Green Flag Award or Green Flag Community Award scheme flags from flagstaffs in parks and other green spaces. 

Extending existing planning permissions


On the 6th September 2012 the Secretary of State announced a one year extension to the temporary provisions (originally introduced in October 2009) which allow applicants to extend the time limits for implementing a planning permission. This one year extension came into force on 1 October 2012.

Applicants with unimplemented extant (live) permissions granted on or before 1 October 2010 (previously the deadline was 1 October 2009) can apply for a replacement permission for the same development, which will then be subject to a new time limit for implementation.

Applications for extensions will be subject to a lower fee, less onerous information and consultation requirements. 

A design and access statement will not be required.

Don't miss the opportunity to extend that hard fought planning permission.

Saturday 22 September 2012

Shale Gas Fracking – Klondyke, Chaos or Compromise


Those of you of a certain age will doubtless remember the award winning American TV series The Beverly Hillbillies, about the poor ,backwoods, Clampett family transplanted to Beverly Hills, California, after inadvertently striking oil on their land. Could shale gas be the next ‘Texas Tea’?

Living as I do in Blackpool, where shale gas exploration in Britain kicked off last year, listening to the doom mongers I was fully expecting to be thrown out of bed to disappear – house and all - into the bowels of the planet as massive ‘earthquakes’ generated by the shale gas extraction process rocked the North-West to its foundations. The reality was, well, nothing, nada, nul point. I asked my wife whether the earth had moved for her at all but not unsurprisingly received the same response. I’m pretty sure she knew I was talking about Fracking.

For those of you who have no idea what I’m talking about, here’s a quick recap. Unlike the fossil fuel extraction we recognise from say the North Sea - where oil and gas is trapped in underground reservoirs and pumped out via an oil/gas well. 

Shale Gas is actually embedded in rock strata and cannot be extracted in the usual manner. It is necessary to pump fluid into the rock under high pressure which then fractures the rock (hence Fracking) and liberates the gas. ‘Propant’ such as sand or ceramic beads is used to hold the cracks in the rock open and the fluid, combining water with additives, gels and acids is used to carry the gas back to the well head.

And therein lies the problem. Fracking activity gave rise to some minor tremors in Blackpool that put a stop to exploration works whilst the Government researched and considered the matter. There are also strong concerns about environmental contamination from the ‘smart water’ used.

The real issue is that shale gas underlies mainland Britain, rather than just being offshore, and this brings the issue closer to people. The extent of potential shale gas reserves is shown on the map below and this is naturally going to exercise most peoples’ minds, not just the NIMBY lobby.

The anti’ lobby kicked into action big-time, making the current grouses about wind farms, energy from waste schemes and HS2 look like minor neighbour disputes. As ever the truth – such as it is – is different from the perception. Much has been made of experiences in the US, with contaminated domestic tap water bursting into flames and even the risk of people glowing in the dark as Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM’s) is brought to the surface. There are several very emotive websites and YouTube video’s; some involving young children who I doubt really know what they are objecting to. You see the vehemence with which this latest ‘blot on the landscape’ is being challenged.

I’m not going to defend or object to shale gas exploration, but here are some facts. The Fracking process is periodic, so any tremors that might occur from time to time are not continuous. Government research published in June 2012(1) noted that the tremors were almost not recordable in extent and equivalent at worst to a lorry passing a house, “unlikely to be felt by anyone”. The amount of water used in the process is not deminimus but, “the amount needed to operate a hydraulically fractured shale gas well for a decade may be equivalent to the amount needed to water a golf course for a month.” Perhaps we need to start looking at sustainable water use provisions in other areas than shale gas? The additives amount to no more than 2% of the water used and most are recovered to the surface for subsequent treatment. The wells are sunk at depths far below aquifers and the risk of any contamination is more likely from surface activity.

But with all the apparent angst there must surely be something to the objections. Various European countries including Denmark and France have banned Fracking. The problems appear to arise from lack of adequate control over the process in the US resulting in natural concerns for the same problems arising here. This is particularly directed to waste water treatment, which is far less rigorously controlled in the US than here in the UK, and the commercial secrecy surrounding the smartwater recipe leading to inevitable  conspiracy theories. The same treatment processes just would not be allowed in this country. And therein lays the difference between the UK and other countries – Regulation.

Oil and gas belongs to the Crown who licence exploration and can apply a diverse range of conditions. The licencing process is rigorous and requires the satisfaction of numerous criteria as well as meeting high technical and financial hurdles. Licences are issued in 10km blocks. There are three rounds of licencing involving 6 years for exploration, 5 years for development and then 20 years for production on a ‘use it or lose it’ basis, with escalating annual charges to make sure that licences are efficiently implemented.

The Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010 are relevant, which although they have yet to fully catch up with shale gas exploration, are sufficient even now to provide strong environmental controls. In addition there are controls exercised via the Water Resources Act 1991 and Water Industry Act 1991.

The requirements of the Petroleum Act 1998 and Mines (Working Facilities & Support) Act 1966 apply. Here again they are playing catch-up but have a bearing on works.

The town planning system also applies, with the usual development controls and consultation requirements, together with screening for EIA in combination with the raft of local and national planning policy.

So, unlike Jed Clampett, simply discovering shale gas reserves on your land is not going to lead immediately to unlimited wealth. In fact the real value to landowners at the moment is debatable. Because the gas is spread widely there are no specific 'sweet spot' locations for drilling and one farmers field may be just as useful as his neighbour. As the landowner does not have a share in the reserves the income is simply derived from letting the land. Not inconsequential perhaps, but by no means involving a mansion in Beverly Hills any time soon.

The jury is out on whether shale gas exploration and extraction is going to take off in this country. The Blackpool ‘field’ is allegedly sufficient to provide the UK with gas for some 56 years. The USA is now self-sufficient to the extent they have begun exporting gas from shale reserves. What Government could look that gift-horse in the mouth given our emerging fuel deficit? After so long benefitting from largely 'out-of-sight and out-of-mind' North Sea reserves, the last thing UK PLC wants to become is beholden to overseas suppliers who might feel inclined to turn off the tap at some point in the future. However, the level of Regulation and attendant cost in extracting the gas on mainland UK may well deter the larger players who can go elsewhere in the world to do their business without the same constraints. 

I anticipate a more considered, compromise, approach to shale gas exploration will emerge from Government quite rapidly in both planning, environmental and licencing policy, in order to address the concerns surrounding its development, but aimed at enabling future growth in this potentially vital energy source. We are not in my view going to see a 'dash for gas', with wells popping up like daisy's in every back garden. And by the time we are all benefiting from home grown gas supplies feeding our ever increasing demand for cheap fuel, there will be something even more 'horrendous' for nay sayers to get their teeth into. 

1. Report by Royal Academy of Engineering and Royal Society – Shale gas extraction in the UK 

For all your planning queries go to www.ruralurbanplanning.co.uk


Sunday 16 September 2012

Planning law changes to make resubmissions easier


Courtesy of the Planning Portal


More developments than before will be able to go-ahead without going through parts of the planning process a second time following planning law changes due to come into force shortly.

The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2010 (DMPO) has been amended to extend the time developments can take advantage of exemptions in the DMPO.

Developments that have received planning permission that are still within their time limit but where work has not yet begun will not have to re-submit design and access statements, conduct full consultations, or provide full plans and drawings when applying for a replacement planning permission.

The amended Order applies the exemptions to those seeking a new planning permission to replace an existing planning permission where the original was granted on or before 1 October 2010.

It applies only to developments where building has not begun and the time limit for that work to begin has not passed. The Order previously only applied the exemptions to permissions granted before October 2009.

The amended Order also changes the rules governing decision notices given by local authorities to applicants for planning permission.

The amendments to the Order come into force on 1 October 2012, with the provisions on decision notices coming into force on 1 December 2012.


Tuesday 11 September 2012

It's Not The Planning Officers It's the Committee's


Last week the Government announced that the planning system was to be relaxed yet again (to the point of virtual non-existence apparently) and they were "Calling time on poor performing town hall planning departments, putting the worst into ‘special measures’ if they have failed to improve the speed and quality of their work and allowing developers to bypass councils. More applications also will go into a fast track appeal process".

Eric Pickles added, "... some councils need to raise their game, by failing to make planning decisions in a timely way. Planning delays create uncertainty both for local residents and local firms. So we will introduce a series of practical measures to help speed up planning decisions and appeals, and major infrastructure".

Now hold on a minute. I travel around Britain dealing with a wide variety of authorities all over the place and frankly, in over 30 years of planning applications, I have come across very few which could honestly be said to have been 'poor'. Irritatingly wedded to Local Plan policy irrespective of the circumstances, Yes. Hugely over-worked and struggling to meet targets because the average officer is bogged down in procedural requirements whilst doing three peoples work at half the pay. Certainly. But after all, they are only obeying Government orders.

I'm sure that somewhere out there there might be an authority that needs to be a bit more positive, or a planning team that could get its act together a bit better. Was it ever thus. Mrs B tells me that every time I step out of the house.

NO. I tell you where the screw up comes, when an application goes to committee. Sadly I sit in too many committees nowadays where members clearly have little or no understanding of even basic planning regulations. 

I sat in a committee meeting not so long ago which quite frankly warranted a prime time Friday night comedy spot. The sheer lack of any understanding of the application, its background, or the Officers detailed report, combined with the tragically poor level of (un-planning) debate would have been laughable if it hadn't been so serious. It made the Parish Council meeting sketches in the Vicar of Dibley look like a Fellows meeting at the Oxford Union.

My 'three minutes of carefully crafted fame' explaining, updating and imparting useful information sailed blissfully over the committee's head. They were on an entirely different planet.

Don't get me wrong. There are some excellent committee's out there with members who bother to prepare and understand the planning law and know what they're doing. But I am here to tell you that they are increasingly in the minority. I don't know what has happened in recent years but the quality of planning committees has really taken a downhill slide. Maybe it's because most applications are dealt with under delegated powers nowadays. 

OK. So its not the sexiest committee in the council, but it is the one that the public at large are most likely to come across in their everyday lives. In that case it should be the one that can demonstrably show at least some semblance of understanding what it is doing.

It is getting so bad I am professionally embarrassed for the Officers who have to sit there on a monthly basis patiently explaining basic planning law to people who evidently can't be bothered to learn it themselves to do their job, or don't remember from the last time they were told - in the previous case, for some. 

Dave, Eric. If you think I am joking, check out a few planning committees and see where the screw-ups really happen. Don't blame the planners. If you are handing planning back to the people, make sure they know what the devil to do with it once they've got it. Therein lies the ways to quicker, more satisfactory decision making and fewer appeals. 

Friday 7 September 2012

Using Floorspace over Shops – Your Permitted Development Rights



Photo Courtesy of Baker Pearce Ltd
The current rush of blood to the head of the Government offering all kinds of changes to permitted development rights and relaxation of planning has had my phone ringing off the hook with people seeking clarification as to what they can and can't do. 

Of course, we will have to await the amending Regulations, but one particular question seemed to recur sufficiently often to encourage me to blog about it here.


The issue at hand revolves around the opportunity to swap and change the use of floorspace over a shop.

The Town & Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 sets out a number of specific Use Classes for planning purposes. You do not need planning permission to change the use of a building within the various confines of each use class, subject to any limiting criteria that might apply. So, for example, you can change a shop (A1) used for retail sale purposes to a funeral directors without requiring planning permission as both types of use fall within the same use class. A handy free schedule or wall chart are downloadable [here].

Equally, by virtue of the Order, you can change between certain use classes without the need for planning permission. You can, for example, change from a Restaurant or Café use (A3) to a Shop use (A1) but NOT the other way around.

Class A1 Shops and Class A2 Financial & Professional Services are both use classes that relate to buildings likely to be found in high street locations, have a ground floor window display and where services are provided principally the visiting members of the public. In either case there is a provision to allow a mixed use with a single flat over the shop without the need for planning permission. In other words if you have a shop with rooms over it that are used as part of the shop (say for storage purposes) then it is possible to convert that to a flat leaving the shop below. Equally, if you already have a flat over a shop it can be converted back to shop use in its entirety without needing planning permission. The same applies for any building used for the delivery of financial and professional services (Class A2)- for example an estate agents, travel agents etc.

However, the Use Classes Order does not explain how this opportunity occurs. The relevant planning controls are in fact exercised through the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended).

Part 3 Class F and G of the GPDO allow as follows:

CLASS F.    Permitted development

Development consisting of a change of the use of a building—

(a)          to a mixed use for any purpose within Class A1 (shops) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order and as a single flat, from a use for any purpose within Class A1 of that Schedule;
(b)        to a mixed use for any purpose within Class A2 (financial and professional services) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order and as a single flat, from a use for any purpose within Class A2 of that Schedule;
(c)       where that building has a display window at ground floor level, to a mixed use for any purpose within Class A1 (shops) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order and as a single flat, from a use for any purpose within Class A2 (financial and professional services) of that Schedule.

There are limiting conditions that state:

F.1    Conditions

Development permitted by Class F is subject to the following conditions—

(a)      some or all of the parts of the building used for any purposes within Class A1 or Class A2, as the case may be, of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order shall be situated on a floor below the part of the building used as a single flat;
(b)     where the development consists of a change of use of any building with a display window at ground floor level, the ground floor shall not be used in whole or in part as the single flat;
(c)      the single flat shall not be used otherwise than as a dwelling (whether or not as a sole or main residence)—
(i) by a single person or by people living together as a family, or
(ii) by not more than six residents living together as a single household (including a household where care is provided for residents).

F.2    Interpretation of Class F

For the purposes of Class F—

“care” means personal care for people in need of such care by reason of old age, disablement, past or present dependence on alcohol or drugs or past or present mental disorder.

Note specifically the use of the term ‘single flat’. The space cannot be converted into multiple units of accommodation. The ground floor must remain in shop use and cannot form part of the flat. And for A2 uses where there is a display window at ground floor level you can also alter the use to A1 and a flat. But this condition just seems to belt and brace the existing provisions anyway.

Class G provides for the conversion back from a mixed flat and shop to a full shop use.

Class G.    Permitted development

Development consisting of a change of the use of a building—

(a)       to a use for any purpose within Class A1 (shops) of the Schedule  to the Use Classes Order from a mixed use for any purpose within Class A1 of that Schedule and as a single flat;
(b)    to a use for any purpose within Class A2 (financial and professional services) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order from a mixed use for any purpose within Class A2 of that Schedule and as a single flat;
(c)     where that building has a display window at ground floor level, to a use for any purpose within Class A1 (shops) of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order from a mixed use for any purpose within Class A2 (financial and professional services) of that Schedule and as a single flat.

G.1    Development not permitted

Development is not permitted by Class G unless the part of the building used as a single flat was immediately prior to being so used used for any purpose within Class A1 or Class A2 of the Schedule to the Use Classes Order.

So the limitation in Class G is that the single flat had to have been used as part of the shop use immediately before the use as a flat, in order to allow for a reversion to shop use. If it has never been used as part of the shop use then the permitted development rights may not apply.

Other limitations

You should always check to ensure that any planning permission over the building has not withdrawn any (or all) permitted development rights by way of planning condition. Equally, check whether there are any Article 4 Directions imposed on the area that might limit permitted development rights accordingly. This is not uncommon in Conservation Areas. If you are a tenant, there may also be limitations imposed by your landlord.

However, assuming that there are no planning or other restrictions, such a change of use can be made without the need for planning permission accordingly.

Don't forget that this allows a change of use rather than physical development so if it is necessary to alter the building substantially or you need to put new windows and doors into the structure then planning permission and Building Regulation approval may be required. Internal works do not usually involve the need planning permission - unless they are structural in nature – but you may nevertheless need to consider Building Regulations (particularly with regard to escape in the event of a fire).

Finally, if you want absolute certainty you can apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness of Proposed Use or Development (the so called CLOPUD) to secure the local authority’s written confirmation that you may proceed without the need for planning permission.

Update:
There's always something else isn't there. Well, Eric Pickles has now confirmed the following:


The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) have said that new permitted development rights are to come into force on 1 October 2012.

Current legislation only allows for one flat to be created above a shop without the need for a planning application, provided the space is not in a separate planning unit from the shop and that there is no change to the outside of the building.

The DCLG states that under the new permitted development rights two flats will be allowed to be created in office or storage space.

Eric Pickles said: "These are common sense planning reforms that will deliver more affordable homes in areas where there are good transport links while ensuring better use of existing developed land.

"Cutting this red tape should be a shot in the arm for the high street, increasing footfall and providing a boost to regeneration."

Any other planning questions you might have can be put through the e-service at www.ruralurbanplanning.co.uk

Tuesday 14 August 2012

PLANNING FOR OFFICE SPACE – A NEW WORLD OF WORK?



Grateful Acknowledgements to Reuters
Despite the economic climate we are still building vast hectarages’ of office floorspace and some key questions keeps coming back to me – Do we really need all the office space that is being built in our cities? Who is going to occupy it? And what happens if it is built but not occupied. Can it be put to other uses?

As some of you may know, I am not only a Chartered Surveyor and Town Planner but have an abiding interest in the use of technology for future working, hence the other project that keeps me gainfully occupied on a daily basis www.handyforwork.com  – a website and APP designed to help people work smarter on the move.

Smart technology is allowing us to work from almost anywhere nowadays and the traditional commute to the office is an increasingly fraught, time consuming and expensive affair. Wouldn’t that time be better spent gainfully employed rather than crammed on the 7:30 from suburbia into the city or stuck on the freeway sucking in exhaust fumes?

Commuting Costs

The average Briton for example spends almost as much time commuting as they do holidaying. Glenn Lyons and Kiron Chatterjee, from the Centre for Transport & Society in the University of the West of England, Bristol, tell us that the average worker in Britain spends 139 hours a year commuting, "the equivalent of 19 standard working days."

Commuting distances in the UK are a great deal more than the average 2.5 miles experienced in 1980. Nowadays many long-distance commuters would dismiss such journeys as working next door. It turns out that one in 25 commuters in Britain now travels more than 100 km (both ways) to work and 10 percent of commuters spend over two hours a day travelling to and from work.

So on the day it has been announced that rail fares in the UK are set to rise again by an average 6.2%, some serious questions are likely to be asked by those same commuters as to whether they can really afford to keep doing it at a time when salaries are stagnant, at best. Maybe there’s another way.

Build it High and let it ….possibly!

A recent Drivers Jonas Deloitte report(1) indicates that in London there is 9.2m sq ft of office space under construction – up 28% since six months ago. Construction volumes have trebled since the 2008 market low and 2013 is set to be record year for the West End market. Activity has also returned to King’s Cross & Docklands areas for the first time in 18 months. The report notes “Commercial office construction increased by 28% in the first quarter of 2012, compared with six months ago and up 44% since a year ago, according to the latest figures. However, whilst the report shows increasing construction, levels are still relatively low in absolute terms”.

The recently opened Shard in London has just under 590,000 square feet of office space, but few if any pre-lets means that most of this remain empty so far. Some schemes have ground to a halt pending pre-lets and it is evident from the report that, ““Despite the upbeat signs from the development data, the reality is that, for some types of offices, tenant demand remains slow. We do believe that significant opportunities exist; but get the product and/or location wrong and the pitfalls could be just as large.”

2013 is set to deliver 2.9m sq ft of available office space, with an average of 2.3m sq ft expected to be delivered annually over the next three years. Matthew Elliott, head of London offices at Drivers Jonas Deloitte, says:

“At first glance, these numbers would appear to be very light, with average Grade A take-up levels at around 5m sq ft per annum over the last 10 years, almost double the amount of space that is set to be delivered. However, occupier demand for Grade A space is declining; 2011 represented the lowest annual take-up in a decade. As a result, London now has a surplus of quality space waiting to be occupied, with 4m sq ft completed and vacant”.

Savills European Office Report for Summer 2012 tells a similar story. They note, “On average, we expect demand in the second half of the year to be stronger than in the first one, and the total annual volume in 2012 should be above the 2011 level in a few markets, notably Amsterdam, Frankfurt and Brussels. Across the markets covered in this report, the letting activity in 2012 will still decrease, on average we forecast that it will be down by 7.7%”.

While developers and banks are wary of entering the market in the current economic conditions, an increasing trend of refurbishments of old office stock has become apparent. In some markets the share of refurbishments has increased from below 10% to about a quarter of all development completions in 2012, for example in Vienna (27%), Madrid (26%) and Milan (25%). Interestingly the refurbishment trend is also very strong in the two London markets, with 58% of completions in the West End and 59% in the City actually being refurbished”.

Working Smarter

Smart working was specifically encouraged during the London Olympics to relieve some of the expected pressure on the transport system and I don’t doubt it will have given pause for thought to many of those businesses who took up the challenge. The world of commerce did not collapse. Businesses did not cease to operate through lack of staff. In fact I have yet to hear any discouraging comments from the London commuting fraternity (or their bosses) who perhaps worked from home for a few days or travelled locally to a pre-arranged hub.

Combine this natural development caution with a growing technological ability to work ‘in the office at home’ (or in micro-hubs co-working space and the like), the increasing costs of travel to work that cannot be covered by pay rises, an increasing self-employed sector as a result of the worldwide recession and a general sense that quality of life is beginning to take precedence over the 7:00am-7:pm commuter grind and you have a cocktail of circumstances that might just be the catalyst that changes the way we work in the future.

I’m not saying for one minute that offices are not needed nor that our conurbations will instantly become wastelands of redundant office blocks. But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to spot the huge amount of empty space around in most towns and cities at the moment.

So what to do with it all? In the UK the Government has mused on the idea of allowing an automatic change of planning use from office to residential and on its face this is an imaginative idea. But they have yet to get to the heart of the multiplicity of issues that might arise if such a proposal is imposed in a blanket fashion and the jury remains out on this one. The key issue is that most business space is neither designed for nor located in a situation that would allow such a change of use to occur without itself leading to substantive problems.

Building Smarter

Working in the rural development sector converting heritage buildings we adopt a standard mantra which is made clear to all our clients and which I think applies for all future office development, and that is ‘The Concept of Reversibility’. Always carry out conversions, or new-build schemes, with an alternative use in mind. If the primary purpose is no longer required it should be straightforward enough to reverse the building into an alternative use without having to demolish and re-build. Something we can't do anyway with Listed Buildings but you get the point.

“Barrio de Los Paracaidistas”
A prototypical tower for the people of Mexico City
With grateful acknowledgement to 
Design: Metous Studio
Too many buildings are still being designed with a single purpose in mind and if that use becomes redundant then the building cannot be used for anything else. That is not only a waste of effort but (wearing my planner hat) unsustainable. Perhaps we need to start thinking more about causing multi-use capable buildings to be constructed from the outset and being a bit more flexible on the compartmentalized office/retail/residential zoning that so often maintains. Echo’s of Ebenezer Howard perhaps, but I’m referring to the buildings as much as the settlement forms themselves.


What if new buildings had a ‘multi-role-combat’ ability with a planning framework that allowed flexible changes of use? If all that 9.2 m sq ft of office space for London were capable of fulfilling more than one role – residential being the next most obvious land use of value – or maybe even designed at the outset with multiple use in mind, then maybe we could really encourage a new way of city living and working.

Ah, I hear you say. The high land values wouldn’t support such development. Maybe not at the moment; but if new ways of working and economic uncertainty lead to even a modest reduction in floorspace requirements then the single-focused office market in city centres that has been the sole driver of land values for the last few decades may begin to experience a see change; perhaps not in the very prime locations but potentially around the immediate periphery.

In the same way that technology has revolutionized our working practices and ability to communicate around the world from wherever we are I believe that in the medium term the same technology (and its successors) will begin to significantly alter our working environments too. We need to think hard now about the future of sustainable city development and about all that vacant office space.

(1) London Office Crane Survey (May 2012) from Drivers Jonas Deloitte