OP
OP
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
https://wotton.stroud.social/new-national-rules-for-planning - a councillor has written about the changes to decision-making processes that came in alongside this. Specifically, by the 30th October if not sooner, councils will update their procedures so fewer plans go to full hearings ("DCC" or "committee") and they can't go on councillor request alone ("call in"). Minor commercial sites and up to 9 dwellings on half an acre can't go to committee at all.
I've mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it makes a planning officer judge, jury and executioner on small developments even when very controversial. And if I'm blunt, some officers seem better than others at applying current policy straightforwardly, rather than bizarre interpretations like it's OK for there to be less cycle parking than the standard says because it's better than the 30-year-old derelict shell on the site before that had no parking at all (seriously, that happened).
On the other, I've certainly seen horrible stuff slip through because a councillor called a plan in and then later quietly withdrew the call-in without telling us, leaving us insufficient time to get it referred any other way, so I won't mourn them losing that power. It was a bit of an odd one because councillors always got pressure from NIMBYs and refusing to call a plan in to a hearing would often lose them votes, but I don't think anyone who would use a new building would be more likely to vote for a councillor who didn't... so some councillors would call in almost anything if asked by their voters, which did slow things down.
I wish this change had been balanced out by increased scrutiny of things like road layout and community space changes after plans are approved, which currently change silently under Highways Act powers and section 106 agreements, but I guess that would need wider-reaching changes than have been made so far.
I've mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it makes a planning officer judge, jury and executioner on small developments even when very controversial. And if I'm blunt, some officers seem better than others at applying current policy straightforwardly, rather than bizarre interpretations like it's OK for there to be less cycle parking than the standard says because it's better than the 30-year-old derelict shell on the site before that had no parking at all (seriously, that happened).
On the other, I've certainly seen horrible stuff slip through because a councillor called a plan in and then later quietly withdrew the call-in without telling us, leaving us insufficient time to get it referred any other way, so I won't mourn them losing that power. It was a bit of an odd one because councillors always got pressure from NIMBYs and refusing to call a plan in to a hearing would often lose them votes, but I don't think anyone who would use a new building would be more likely to vote for a councillor who didn't... so some councillors would call in almost anything if asked by their voters, which did slow things down.
I wish this change had been balanced out by increased scrutiny of things like road layout and community space changes after plans are approved, which currently change silently under Highways Act powers and section 106 agreements, but I guess that would need wider-reaching changes than have been made so far.
