Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.


Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "PLANNING LAW UPDATE or Top Ten from 2006 CLARE PARRY 2-3 GRAYS INN SQUARE."— Presentation transcript:


2 1.OUTLINE/DETAILED PERMISSIONS DCLG Circular 01/2006 – Design and Access statements from Aug 10 th 2006 on nearly all new applications (not change of use, engineering or mining or mostly existing dwelling houses). Amendments to Articles 1 & 3 GDPO to definition of reserved matters (access, appearance, landscaping, layout & scale). Details to be supplied on outlines, e.g. upper and lower heights of buildings to be supplied.

3 1.OUTLINE/DETAILED PERMISSIONS No longer just able to deal with general principle of development. See article in September 2006 JPL

4 1. OUTLINE/DETAILED PERMISSIONS With regard to EIA development, EA no longer just at outline stage, may be needed at detailed stage too, see R. (Barker) v Bromley LBC & FSS [2006] UKHL 52 Carry out at detailed stage if (a) significant environmental effects not identified at outline stage or (b) they were, but fresh assessment required (probably arising from a change in circumstances) Article in August 2006 JPL

5 2.Village Greens Oxfordshire County Council v. Oxford City Council [2006] UKHL 25 The House of Lords has spoken, yet again on village greens. Once registered for dog walking can be used for any reasonable sporting pursuit. 20 years runs to date of application, not decision. Commons Act 2006 – article [2006] Nov. JPL JPL [2007] February - state of uncertainty still exists, even with HL and Parliament.

6 3.GYPSIES New Circular – ODPM 01/06 Trio of cases: South Bucks DC v Smith [2006] EWHC 281, South Cambs v. Flynn [2006] EWHC 1320 & BANES v. Connors [2006] EWHC 1595. Paragraphs 45/6 of Circular have had an impact but not as great as first thought in injunction cases. Article February 2007 JPL

7 4.Planning obligations New guidance issued by DCLG but not in a Circular! Planning Obligations: Practice Guidance Model Planning Obligations (Section 106) Agreement (drafted by Law Societys Planning & Environmental Law Committee) – see article and response in December [2006] JPL

8 5. Enforcement – 2 points First, intensification can lead to a material change of use – see R (Childs) v FSS [2005] EWHC 2368. Secondly, time limit for breach of condition in respect to use of a building as a dwellinghouse – 4 or 10 years? CA overrule 1 st instance Judge and determine that it is 4 years in all cases. FSS v Arun DC [2006] EWCA Civ 1172, [2007] JPL 237

9 6.EXCEPTIONS TO TPOS PERRIN & RAMAGE v NORTHAMPTON BC [2006] EWHC 2331 (TCC) When can one top, lop, cut down etc to abate a nuisance (s.198(6)(b))? 1 st – Nuisance means actionable nuisance, not just an overhanging branch. 2 nd – Irrelevant that an alternative scheme, ie root protection, could also abate nuisance. On appeal. See article [2007] Feb JPL

10 7.Housing – new PPS 3 Plan, monitor and manage remains. New definition of affordable housing – excludes low cost market housing Low cost market housing will be part of mix required on larger sites. No presumption that PDL or whole of curtilage should be redeveloped.

11 8.Development in breach of condition Newton v Sullivan R.(Hart Aggregates Ltd) v. Hartlepool [2005] EWHC Admin has blurred the boundaries of the rule in Whitley. Norris v FSS & Ano [2006] EWCA Civ 12 – no mention of Hart. Unlawful operations cannot amount to the commencement of development. Laws LJ Article in January 2007 JPL

12 9(a) DELAY & JR Hardy v Pembrokeshire CC & others [2006] EWCA Civ 240, [2007] JPL 284 Planning challenges still need to be made promptly.

13 9(b) DELAY AND COMMENCEMENT Section 73 of the Act is amended, so that if development is not commenced within the time limits you cannot use s. 73 to extend the time. (from 24.8.06) See Commentary November 2006 JPL

14 10.BARKER REPORT All change please 210 pages, 32 recommendations For the new or soon to be old development plan system, see Article in [2007] January JPL. Reform plan-making at local level, new system for major infrastructure projects, positive planning – a reintroduction of the harm test?, review of Green Belt boundaries, removal of need for planning permission for minor commercial developments, reduction in form filling, raising planning officer status …

15 10.BARKER REPORT Compulsory training for members of committees. And PPS 25 Flooding

Download ppt "PLANNING LAW UPDATE or Top Ten from 2006 CLARE PARRY 2-3 GRAYS INN SQUARE."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google