Skip to content

New Planning Minister

by on September 5, 2012

I’d like to welcome our new Planning Minister Nick Boles to DCLG and look forward to an early opportunity to spread the Portal message.

Here’s the DCLG ministerial team on the DCLG website.

  1. Bob Thom permalink

    Having welcomed the incoming Housing Minister can the Portal Director outline his plans for the Portal to take in the impact of the new Government Proposals for the revision of Planning Systems eg the impact on PD,s. Portal Users will be interested in the detail changes to PD.s and the interaction with the need for Planning Applications, will the guides be changed etc. ie when will the pronouncements (time table) be incorporated in to the execution functions of the Portal.

    • Hi Bob,
      like everyone else I will have to wait to see the detailed outcomes of the announcements.
      We will of course need to make changes to our content, guides etc and reflect any neccesary changes in the question sets on which 1App is built.
      But before then everything will be subject to the consultation, review and legislative process!
      I will do my very best to keep you all informed of forthcoming changes as and when they are formally confirmed.

  2. relieved to read in the Times that the changes are a proposal and there will be one month consultation with target of Jan 2013 to implement. Seems odd to get everyone worked up about it at this stage though so i guess it will happen. Mind you I can’t see the domestic extension rules changing as a) it will cause grief, & b) it won’t make extensions any more affordable. The govt should be taking an intelligent look at why people want to extend and then the VAT liability to make it easier. To be honest I get the impression that the building trade is being kept v/busy building extensions at the moment.

  3. there badly needs to be new PD rules in respect of specific house types, set by the LPAs not DCLG

    • Michael Conoley permalink

      Any changes to the GPDO should be led by Central Government in consultation with practising Architects.This will ensure that the changed rules allow for good design which compliments the existing building to which they are attached or the curtilages in which they sit. Building designers have been dismayed that the LPAs will in many cases (some LPAs are worse than others), and particularly since October 2008(ie statute 2362 coming into being) try and enforce dull box like designs by interpreting the rules in an overly prescriptive manner. It is often thought in the expectation that the client will not wish to proceed with the implementation of their CoLD. For this reason alone the LPAs should not be involved in writing the rules, and also preferably not invoved in determining the applications which should be left to bodies without vested political interests.

      • Bob Thom permalink

        The current PD regulations were produced as a result of peer review following the Killain Pretty report on Planning. The condition of the economy then was very different to today’s. Politicians are aware of an increasing need of more accommodation for the population increase and the need to promote economic activity. They see the increasing of PD guide lines for an acceptable building extension as a means to achieve this. The acceptability of any proposals need to take on comment on there practicality, that should include Central Government, LPA’s, Architects etc as previously referenced to produce the current PD. For to long LPA,s subjective opinion has restrained the objective definition of acceptability. Before PD’s some LPA,s argued that diagrammatic guide were of no use where at the same time other LPA’s used them as illustrations of acceptable designs. We should not return to 300 plus LPA’s subjective opinions of unaceptableness when the majority of reasonable opinion would find it acceptable ie complies with the requirements of PD,s. What is the point in demanding a South facing extension has materials as the original when 85% of the roof are will be covered by PD acceptable Solar Panels. Alternatively an LPA finding the profile of a building design as “Intrusive and out of keeping” when existing PD guide lines for size and location accepts it. Neither do we need politicians, both local and central government making judgmental instant demands that will cause even more chaos than they solve.

  4. Brendan permalink

    I shouldn’t worry too much, just like the last ‘significant, ground breaking changes’ they will be watered down to a meaningless drip by the time the consultation period has finished and the exemptions are added.

  5. Agree with Brendan I argue the case that these PD changes will be another false dawn in Building Design this Friday. LPAs managed to get their legal departments to come up with all sorts of ways to negate the 2008 ammendments and don’t expect anything different this time. These box extensions don’t really relate to Victorian terraces which are often L shaped, sometimes in conservation areas, and a a high percentage of the housing stock we should be upgrading.
    Andrew has it right VAT of 20% on refurb and extension is a killer to many schemes

  6. It was with great interest that i read about the proposed planning changes, re: 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,

    When will this also be passed onto Wales who have the most restrictive plannig rules. This includes a Blanket CSH regardless of location. My application was passed in 09, but when i wanted to do a modification in 2011, i was expected to start again…

  7. Gary Morris permalink

    The trouble with these ground breaking government proposals as Ian has touched upon is that people think they can build what they like where they like and any size they please. They hear the headlines on the news and think the planning laws have been abolished. I hope this current dogs dinner of permitted developement is made clearer to the general public and builders alike.

  8. I sense from comments made that tinkeing with the current mishmash pd isn’t ground breaking, a bit of quite evolution to slightly more relaxed pd ok, but neyond that smakc os panicking by government to find a popular pet project. More important in the rural areas in our case (Oxfordshire and mid/south England) to allow small scale housing in mid and smaller villages, take a reasonal commuted sum and use it on RES (Rural Exception Sites) peppered on the edges of these same villages – currently we have one “infil” policy that has been in for about 8 years and not one site has been allowed as a result of it – but tell that to our local planning team and they don’t seem to get it! And when is the NPPF goping to start affecting apeals so Councils take more notice?

  9. I agree with Andy, as above, that “the building trade is being kept v/busy building extensions at the moment.” If buildings can be extended up to 8m as PD, surely that will use up all the builders needed to implement the permissions already granted for the homes London needs desperately that are not being built, except by Berkeley Homes and a few others.

    • IN my area of West Oxfordshire, it won’t make any difference if PD rights are extened, s we don’t experience a recession generally. The problem is the dearth of new housing consents, the new core strategy is as always looking at green field chunks and unreasably restricting village housing. Unless the “material considerations” within the NPPF show their teeth in appeals, then this won’t change.

Leave a Reply to Andrew Hirst (@AND01) Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: