Permission in Principle - Allocated Sites - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Permission in Principle - Allocated Sites
Hi
The Housing and Planning Act introduces the Permission in Principle (PiP) for sites allocated in DPDs. This means that allocated sites won't need a traditional planing application but rather a 'technical details consent'. The PiP takes effect when the DPD is adopted.
Am I right in thinking that PiP applies to all DPDs that have yet to be adopted?
We are currently consulting on our publication draft which includes references to matters being dealt with in future planning applications and we advise residents that they will be able to have a say on matters of detail through the consultation on planning applications. This is going to be an important issue as the consultation on the PiP indicated that there wouldn't be a requirement to consult with the community on technical details consents. This would cause significant concerns for residents who live adjacent to some of our sites especially in areas which are doing neighbourhood plans.
Thanks!
Tom Dillarstone
John Rowley, modified 8 Years ago.
RE: Permission in Principle - Allocated Sites
New Member Post: 1 Join Date: 06/04/16 Recent PostsHi Tom,
The H&PA is only really half the story - we'll get the rest with the publication of the statutory instrument that includes the development order. This should set out the requirements for a Local Plan to effectively give permission in principle.
However, we do know (see the new section 59A inserted into the TCPA 1990 under section 150 of the H&PA) that the "qualifying document" (ie the Local Plan) must indicate that the land in question is allocated (for the purposes of section 59A). So - if you don't want your Local Plan to allocate sites for PiP, then it's simple not to: you just don't say that it allcoates sites for PiP.
I don't remember anything in the consultation that said that there would be no requirement to consult on technical details consents. I would find this very surprising, given what these will cover. PiP is going to be very high level stuff, so I don't see how you could give full permission under technical details without consulting. I can't see anything in the Act that says this.
Hope that helps!
Rob
John, Rob
Thanks for the replies - very useful. Agree that we'll need to wait until the Development Order and Regs to get the full picture. Given that we expect to submit later this year I would imagine that we'll get these prior to adoption of our plan and therefore be caught in the PiP regime. I'm not convinced that it will be as simple as saying that we don't grant PiP - we'll need robust arguments as to why as Developers are likely to push for it.
The reference to consultation was in para 2.35 of this document ansd just relates to consultation with the community. Although no requirement we are going to come under pressure from local residents to consult while developers will argue we shouldn't.
Thanks!
Tom
Hi Tom,
I think you're wise to robustly review whether you need to allocate sites and give PiP in the Local Plan - as you say, developers will push for this and you won't know what the regs require until too close to your submission to change tack.
I'll tactfully row back on my previously bullish statement about consultation, having had a look at that document. I see what govt are trying to achieve here, but you're absolutely right that it's not going to be popular with local residents (though it may encourage them to get more involved at an earlier stage, which is a good thing in principle). One potential confusion will be how PiP sets the "parameters of the technical details that need to be agreed" - how would that work? What do they mean by parameters? This sort of (broadly speaking) infrastructure stuff is often what has most impact on the local community and they may feel like a sleight of hand is being carried out between a Local Plan that sets the infrastructure parameters (which they are consulted on) and then a Technical Details application that solves those problems which they are not consulted on.
This is going to be interesting.