Actually, it’s not, now that Orange UK is firmly in the past and the advert featuring the company’s long-running strapline has been taken off the telly. Nevertheless, the company has left a legacy in Orange Personal Communications Services Ltd. & Ors, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Islington [2006]. This court judgment featured in a recent appeal against the refusal of outline planning permission for the redevelopment of a former Co-op store in the east Midlands with nine dwellings (DCS Number 400-025-646).
Posts By: dcplatest
The new normal?
We have seen a good number of appeal cases relating to lawful development certificates where inspectors have issued decisions without the benefit of a site visit. This might be unsurprising, given that such appeals turn on the facts of the case rather than matters of planning judgement. In a new development, we now have an example of a section 78 appeal which the inspector has decided without a site visit (DCS Number 400-025-725).
Out on the streets
In Unprecedented times we flagged up an enforcement appeal decision in which the inspector accepted that an uncertain situation currently exists with regard to Covid-19 but nevertheless reasoned that under s173A of the Act the council had the power to extend the time for compliance with the notice. In a further enforcement appeal relating to an unauthorised house in multiple occupation in north London (DCS Number 400-025-551), however, the inspector extended the compliance period, recognising that the effect of the notice would be to deprive the tenants of their homes at a time when they would be unlikely to find somewhere else to live.
Tact and discretion
Planning inspectors are, of course, public servants and must always treat appellants with the utmost courtesy and respect. On occasion that must prove quite a challenge. We rather admired the following phrasing, found in an appeal against an enforcement notice directed at the unauthorised residential conversion of a pub in Oxfordshire (DCS Number 400-025-507).
Viel Gluck
A recent court case, Gluck v Secretary of State for Housing Communities and Local Government [2020], has brought good luck to a local authority in Cheshire which found itself unable to determine a prior approval application under Class Q of the GPDO within the requisite period.
Taken out of context
The planning application process demands that information is provided about the context in which a development site is located. Given that that context might comprise land which is outside the control of the applicant, it can be problematic to provide information that is totally accurate. Nevertheless, providing inaccurate information has resulted in an unfortunate outcome for a would-be developer in north London.
Unprecedented times
As we all now know, we live in unprecedented times, and we are all having to adapt in one way or another. For its part, the Planning Inspectorate is busily exploring new ways of working and decision-making whilst adhering to the principles of fairness, openness and impartiality. In this context, we thought it might be useful to flag up a recent appeal against an enforcement notice which required the demolition, within twelve months, of an unauthorised house in Kent (DCS Number 400-025-508).
A wicked problem
An inspector has allowed a takeaway near to three primary schools on Merseyside, reasoning that primary school children would not be allowed out of school on their own, and so would be unable to buy takeaway food (DCS Number 400-025-467). You might think that perhaps the inspector has a point…until reading a further appeal decision, relating to a takeaway in Gateshead, in which the inspector reasons that where there are overweight children in an area there are probably also overweight adults, and planning policies are aimed at improving the health of the population as a whole (DCS Number 400-025-220).
A textbook example
Every now and then an inspector writes a decision which is quite simply a textbook example of how to approach a particular situation. Here is a good one relating to a log cabin within the curtilage of a dwelling (DCS Number 400-024-865) which you might wish to file and use for reference, should you come across a similar proposal during your own work.
Causing an obstruction
Class B of Part 2 to Schedule 2 of the GPDO permits the formation, laying out and construction of a means of access to a highway which is not a trunk road or a classified road, where that access is required in connection with development permitted by any Class of Schedule 2 (other than by Class A of Part 2). Article 3(6) of the GPDO states, however, that the permission granted by Schedule 2 does not authorise any development which creates an obstruction to the view of persons using any highway used by vehicular traffic, so as to be likely to cause danger to such persons. But what might constitute an obstruction? In determining an appeal against refusal of a certificate of lawfulness for a vehicular access to a new driveway at a house in Buckinghamshire, an inspector found that the use itself of the access would cause an obstruction (DCS Number 400-024-695).
News from PlanningResource
- Around one in ten young people have knowingly engaged in local plan consultations, survey finds August 18, 2020Research shows that 11 per cent of young adults have knowingly engaged in local plan consultations to guide new development in their areas, according to a new study.
- Built heritage groups 'likely to oppose' nine-storey Kings Cross pharma hub August 18, 2020A brewing dispute over a planned nine-storey building beside one the country's best-known railway stations heads today's newspaper roundup.
- West London council accepts loss of listed building to approve mixed-use college redevelopment August 18, 2020Councillors in the London Borough of Brent have approved plans for the redevelopment of an adult education centre, after finding the benefits of the proposed development outweighed the ‘highly regrettable’ loss of a locally listed building.
- Consultancy wins planning work to drive council regeneration plans August 18, 2020Property consultancy Lambert Smith Hampton (LSH) has been appointed by Thurrock Council in Essex to help deliver a £6 billion regeneration and housing development programme.
- City council green-lights central Oxford’s ‘first new college of the 21st century’ August 17, 2020Permission has been granted for three existing university buildings to be converted to form Oxford’s 39th college within the city’s central conservation area.
- How the planning white paper would change ... planning enforcement August 17, 2020A promise to "review and strengthen" council's enforcement powers and sanctions if new development does not meet the required design and environmental standards, including consideration of higher fines, features in the government's new planning white paper.
- 'Affordability row over plans for 700-home brownfield development' August 17, 2020A dispute over plans for 700 homes on a former gasworks site in Brighton leads our round-up of today's newspapers and news websites.
- Five authorities to pilot new spatial nature recovery strategies August 17, 2020Five local authorities are to trial the creation of new "local nature recovery strategies" (LNRS) which are intended to "support better spatial planning for nature", the government has announced.
- Thurrock Council secures injunction to block illegal development on 40-hectare green belt site August 17, 2020An Essex local authority has secured an interim High Court injunction to prevent unauthorised works on a 40-hectare green belt site - the latest in a series of court interventions by the council to restrict illegal works taking place at the location.
- High Court grants council permission to challenge inspector's green belt traveller site permission August 14, 2020The High Court has allowed a council to pursue a legal challenge to a planning inspector's decision to block its attempts to shut down a traveller encampment in the Merseyside green belt.