Neighbourhood Plan Conformity - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

My understanding is that you wouldn't be able to have an adopted NP, unless you had an 'up to date' local plan for it to conform to. Although 'up to date' has yet to be defined (perhaps because it should be decided locally?), I would say if the LA have clear plans to replace their existing Local Plan in the near future then it wouldn't be appropriate to prepare/adopt an NP until the new Local Plan is adopted.

Holly: I concur entirely: a NP should not be started until the core strategy is adopted. I suspect that Councils will need to issue "certificates" of compliance for the examination in public, else they will be regarded as not being in conformity with the District Plan. Whilst I’m aware that the hierarchy would suggest its PPS, then Core Strategy (LDF) and finally NP, the world is not made that way. In reality parishes will move on their NP’s in advance, but I would resist the referendum and examination until the Core Strategy, and possibly the housing/employment allocations have been agreed. NPs can then be quickly amended, if needed, and adopted, possibly at the same full Council meeting… how’s that for joined up thinking. Phill

The 'permitted assumption' rule applies That is you are permitted to assume the higher tier draft plan will be adopted - if it has more up to date targets. It was upheld yonks ago by the courts and many planners have stuck to it unconsciously PPS3 on sites in emerging plans when their is a shortage of a 5 year supply doesn't make sense without it Wales also looked at this issue when issuing advice last year on emerging plans and based their advice on it.

Sorry the case applied to general conformity to a structure plan - but is interpreted to apply to all general conformity cases.

I am interested by Philip's approach and how this squares with a quote from Richard McCarthy, Director General of the DCLG. He stated that "Any Core Strategy produced after a neighbourhood plan was in place would have to conform to that neighbourhood plan." This is part of the Government's stick-based approach to 'get on and get your Core Strategy' adopted. Given that, I would have thought that it woulf be difficult to resist the referendum. In any event, it is hoped that neighbourhood plans will be produced in accordance with emerging Core Strategies. It would certainly be risky to produce an NP that totally contradicts it - or at least the parish council had better have a very sound evidence base.

It seems that CLG have a view on this, see http://www.pas.gov.uk/pas/core/page.do?pageId=1240896 which I read as saying NP plans can be adopted prior to a CS. You may want to probe further though. Can't wait to see if the Bill and Regs help!

The question goes to the heart of what many will see as the potential real conflicts between NPs and DPs (core strategy). Chris is quite right that "This is part of the Government's stick-based approach to 'get on and get your Core Strategy' adopted". It is easy to foresee however the scenario where both the NP and Core strategy come to very different conclusions about the valid planning policy that should be adopted for a particular area even in the light of identical evidence bases. There has and never will be a single definitive planning solution for an area. Real choices (political/subjective) need to be made based on the weight attached to various competing planning needs and objectives. I am therefore not fully convinced that Chris's hopes that - "neighbourhood plans will be produced in accordance with emerging Core Strategies" will in fact come to fruition. The timing of seeking to adopt an NP could therefore be critical. Philip is correct in supposing that some Parishes will move on their NPs in advance, some already are. I have already attended one well informed Neighbourhood Forum where they are trying to force the hand of the emerging Core Policy by "getting their policy in first". In this instance they rightly identified what they judged to be the environmental implications for their area from the housing allocations being proposed in the emergent DP Core Policies. Another strategy for a Neighbourhood Forum may be to seek a Parish referendum proposing a contrary policy choice argued from the same evidence base after the Core Strategy is adopted and then argue that your proposed NP policy is therefore more up to date! This sort of situation runs contrary to the idealised seamless planning system and joined up thinking that many would like us to believe could exist. If nothing else planning is about conflict and conflict resolution. In my opinion the key to the outcome will be whether there is sufficient political will at Westminster to devolve real planning power down to the Neighbourhood level and whether the potential conflicts this could cause for national economic recovery is really worth it at this time. If they are, then this will challenge the "permitted assumption rule" correctly identified by Andrew. Will the long established top down planning hierarchy familiar to us all therfore persist? - or will well organised Neighbourhoods force the issue? What level of democratically made decision making is the more legitimate? Sally is of course right that we will have to wait and see whether the eventual Bill and Regs will clarify the matter. If these are not explicit enough then I foresee that John's original question could form the basis of a judicial challenge at some point along the lines of the Carla Homes challenge.