RIBA - Good Practice Guide - Making Successful Planning Applications

Good Practice Guide
Making Successful
Planning Applications
Colin Haylock
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Copyright RIBA Publishing

Provided by Accuris Licensee=TU Dublin/5946591001, User=Roe, David
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from Accuris Not for Resale, 10/26/2023 14:10:42 MDT
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Good Practice Guide
Making Successful
Planning Applications
Colin Haylock
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
EN
IM
EC
SP

EN
IM
EC
SP
© RIBA Publishing, 2020
Published by RIBA Publishing, 66 Portland Place, London,

W1B 1AD
Commissioning Editor: Alex White
ISBN 9781 85946 920 0
Assistant Editor: Clare Holloway
The right of Colin Haylock to be identified as the Author Production: Richard Blackburn
of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the Cover design by Design by S-T Ltd
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 sections 77 and 78. Designed by Studio Kalinka
Typeset by Academic + Technical, Bristol
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be Printed and bound by Page Bros, Norwich
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted,
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, While every effort has been made to check the accuracy and
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior quality of the information given in this publication, neither
permission of the copyright owner. the Author nor the Publisher accept any responsibility for
the subsequent use of this information, for any errors or
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data omissions that it may contain, or for any misunderstandings
arising from it.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the
British Library. www.ribapublishing.com
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Contents
About the author V
Acknowledgements VII
Introduction IX
1 Design and the planning system 1
2 Do I need planning consent or any other

planning-related consents? 7
3 Principles for approaching the planning

ng system 19
5
Strategic definition at project inception
Applications and consents

eption
ption EN 39
45
IM
6 Design Statement as a design
sign process
esign proces tool 65
7 Conditions 75
EC
8 Viability, developer obligations and agreements

per obligation 87
9 Appeals, enforcement and using specialist support

nforcement an 95
SP
10 Proactive engagement with the shaping and operation of

ve engag
engageme
the planning
lanning
anning system
syste
syst 105
ix
x A: Heritage,
Appendix H Design and Access Statement
example 113
Appendix B: RIBA Plan of Work 2020 137
Glossary 141
Endnotes 143
Index 145
Image credits 147
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

EN
IM
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
EC
SP

About the author
Colin Haylock RIBA, PPFRTPI, IHBC He was President of the Royal Town
is an architect, planner and a former Planning Institute (RTPI) in 2012 and
member of the RIBA Planning Group. is still involved with the continuation
He is Principal at Haylock Planning of CABE activities through the
and Design and Partner at Spence Design Council. He works extensively
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
and Dower. with neighbourhood plan groups,
helping to build the case for locally
Colin has over 40 years’ practice sensitive development based on the
experience spanning the public and understanding
nding and enrichment of
ing a
private sectors. He led a large qualityy of place.
multi-disciplinary Environmental
Design Team for Newcastle City
Council for over 10 years and then
spent over 10 years with a
EN olin was the only
Colin
based memb
member
onl
o non-London
membe of Boris Johnson’s
Mayor’s De
Design Advisory Group
twin-track career leading planning and has
ha recently completed a
IM
and urban design for a major three
three-and-a-half-year term as one
architectural practice and acting
ing as
ting of three
t appointed independent
a Regional Representative and nd members of the Planning Committee
EC
Enabler for the Commission

sion for for the Old Oak and Park Royal
Architecture and the Built
Bui Development Corporation.
Environment (CABE).
BE). During this
ked
ed as a memb
period, he worked member of He is a Visiting Professor at the
Bartlett School of Planning and a
SP
CABE’s Planning
ning Advisory
Advis Group,
G
contribu
contrib
making a major contribution to its former Visiting Professor of Practice
work on Design Access
sign and A in the School of Architecture,
Statements andnd the
th approaches to Planning and Landscape at
design policy in local plans. Newcastle University.
V
EN
IM
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
EC
SP

Acknowledgments
This guide stems from the Jeremy Beecham, Russell Blackburn,

experiences gained in a long and Christine Whalley, members of
varied career working at the interface my former team at Newcastle City
between planning and architecture Council, the extended CABE family,
in practice, advising government including Bridget Sawyers, Esther
and teaching. It was developed from Kurland and the members of the
a presentation I gave at the 2018 Planning Advisory Committee where
Guerrilla Tactics conference. we crafted the former Government’s
guidance on n De
Design and Access
I want to thank the wonderfully Statements,
ments, former colleagues at
ents, my fo
supportive team at the RIBA and
RIBA Publishing, particularly Alex
White, who commissioned the
book, Clare Holloway and Richard
EN Ryder
and
er Architecture, Matthew Carmona
nd colleagues in
London, and
i the Bartlett School
a University College
of Planning at
an my Member and Officer
a
Blackburn, and the anonymous
IM
colleag
colleagues during my time with the
reviewers of my draft material, whoo Old O
Oak and Park Royal Development
encouraged me with their supportive
pportive Co
Corporation. Finally, I’d like to thank
comments and enriched its ts coverage
overage my current colleagues at Spence
EC
through their practice experience.

xperience. and Dower, including my wife and
business partner, Tina Gough – my
Beyond this, I wouldld like to
uld
greatest support and harshest critic,
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
convey my thanks ks to just some
and the author of the Heritage,
of those who made a major
o have mad m
SP
Design and Access Statement which

on
contributionn to various stages
st of
forms an appendix to the guide and
the career that
hat helped
helpe shape this
fulsomely illustrates many of the
guide – Gerald d Zetter,
Zett Arthur Ling,
points the guide tries to make.
Jimmy James, Tony Crook, Roy Ashton,
VII
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Introduction
M any architects feel that dealing with planning is one of the most
ild Regulations
difficultandfrustratingelementsoftheirwork.Building
typically apply consistently across all working locationss and
an variations in
ontrast,inprimary
interpretationandapplicationareminimal.Bycontrast, prim areas of
EN
regulation,planningrequirementsappearto oftenare,subject to
obe,andofte
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
significantvariation from place to place. Given the scope ffor discretion

within the planning system and its basis in decision-m
decision-making by elected
representatives on local councils, it can appear in inconsistent, arbitrary and
IM
subjective.
s
However, planning is less arbitrary and subjective than many architects
meworks and reference points that are used by
think. There are key frameworks
EC
planners to guide thee making of pla

planning policies and their application in
the determinationn of applications.
applicatio Most architects have a good working
understanding g of the fundam
fundamentals and much detail of the Building
Regulations. This can contrast
cont starkly with their understanding of
SP
po
national planning policy and guidance.
al aim of this guide is to help architects navigate the

The central
complexities and perceived vagaries of the planning system in theory and
practice. The planning system has a substantive basis in civil law and can
stray into criminal law, particularly in the case of listed buildings. Given its
legal basis, the system is quasi-judicial in its operation. Planning law and
regulation must try to cover all eventualities. In this context, it generates
an enormous range of documents that can leave even frequent users
struggling to find what is most relevant to their needs.
A relatively brief guide cannot cover all aspects and eventualities in

an architect’s contact with the planning system and, without constant
revision, it cannot reflect the detailed changes that are frequently made at
the edges of the planning system, such as modifications to the definition
of permitted development. Furthermore, it cannot reasonably address the
differences in the legal frameworks governing planning between England,
Wales and Scotland.
IX
Good Practice Guide: Making Successful Planning Applications
Accepting these limitations, this guide works predominantly with the English
system and focuses on core features in the construction and operation of the
planning system, highlighting paths to detailed key requirements. In focusing
on paths to these details, rather than fully stipulating requirements that were
current at the time of writing, it becomes easier for users to check on any
updating or specific geographical application of requirements.
This approach is particulary important in a period when substantial changes

to the planning system are under discussion. The guide offers help in working
with the existing system and in addressing areas which in any changed system
will still be subject to the need for specific planning permission.
We appreciate the guide is likely to be referred to for information at various

pter
stages of the journey through the planning process. The chapters ter are therefore
designed to give relatively self-contained coverage of the particula
particular stage or
issue they relate to – with references, where helpful, to fuller coverag
coverage of some
aspects in other chapters.
Standing back from the detail of the planning system,

ystem,
sociated with d
similarity between the thought processes associated
EN
tem, there is a surprising
design development
IM
and planning considerations. Ideally, theyy proceed from the strategic through
increasing levels of detail. Both can bee conceived as lines
l of conversation
which establish key elements that form
orm
rm the basis fofor further exploration and
sary for delivery.
development of the detail necessary delivery
delive
EC
early sets out

The RIBA Plan of Work 2020 clearly o this process of design
development from strategygy to detail. The planning equivalent is not mirrored in
ut can be inferred
a single publication but inferre from the stages in planning, from the
SP
making and application

ation strategic
tion of strategi
strat and detailed policy to its application in the
ocess.
decision-making process.
uide is to help make the conversation between those

A central aim of this guide
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
involved in the planning system as clear and productive as possible at each

stage. It is, therefore, structured around what is likely to be going on in the
design development side – and what are likely to be key elements at that stage
that operators of the planning side will be looking to explore.
The RIBA Plan of Work 2020 recognises two important areas in the relationship
with planning. First, Stage 0 prompts early strategic thinking about the
potential project and how best to approach it. Second, the relationship with
planning is a process that often extends through several Plan of Work stages
rather than being focused on a predefined point.
This guide broadly follows the stages in the RIBA Plan of Work 2020
(see Appendix B for full details), reflecting what is likely to be going on in
design development at each stage – and what is likely to be going on in
parallel in terms of the planning process. It is designed to encourage and
X
Introduction
Strategic
Use Definition
7 0
Preparing
Handover and Briefing
6 1
Plan of Work
5 2
Manufacturing Concept
and Construction Design
Technical
EN 4 3
Spatial
S
Design Coordination
IM
Figure 0.1: RIBA Plan of Work 2020
support an effective conversation

ersation between
betwe
betwee architects and planners at each
EC
stage. However, it must stt be sensitive tto the currently limited capacity of the
planning system to engage
ngage with and
an respond to all stages of this conversation.
In this context, it is designed to help architects conduct their side of the
conversation as clearly as pos po
possible and in a way that makes it as easy as
SP
possible forr planners tto enengage with and provide responses.
A core recommendation
mmendat
mmendati is the production of a Design Statement, prepared
and developed d from
fro the beginning of work on projects and used as a design
process tool to provide a framework for explaining and justifying proposals
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
as they are developed. This is essentially the architect’s side of the planning
conversation and it can pick up, respond to, reflect and incorporate planning
issues and responses as they are identified and addressed during the
development of the project.
The final section of this guide reflects on the potential for architects to take a
more active role in shaping the planning frameworks within which they work.
A richer engagement on the part of architects in the processes concerning
the preparation of and consultation on planning system components, such as
local plan policies, local guidelines and validation requirements, may help to
make these much more sensitive to their needs as the eventual users.
The guidance in this book is intended to provide an accessible distillation

of the complexities of the operation of the planning system in practice.
XI
In many cases, it underlines the merits of advancing work on certain aspects

of planning to earlier stages of the design process than may be normal. It is
hoped that it will help architects anticipate and plan for the work they will
need to do in steering projects through the planning system and, from this,
reasonably scope and programme their services and related fee bases. Further,
it provides coverage in a form which architects can readily use to explain and
justify to their clients the planning-related elements of the work they will need
to undertake in endeavouring to deliver their clients’ projects.
In essence, the aim is to give architects the best possible chance of making
successful planning applications.
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
XII
1 Design and the
planning system
EN
IM
This opening chapter outlinesnes the shape of the planning system and key
aspects of its operation with particular focus on the areas where the
th a particul
EC
process involved in the

he design of development,
de and the architect’s role in
st likely to int
its delivery, are most interface with it.
The basic
sic planning framework
SP
In contrast
st to the zoning- and coding-based planning systems operating
in many otherer countries,
co the UK has a highly discretionary planning
system. The fundamental basis of this system is the primacy of the
development plan.
Reduced to its simplest form, the discretionary system requires local

planning authorities (LPAs) to prepare local development plans which
follow and apply national planning policy in response to local contexts
and their planning needs and to determine applications for planning
permission in accordance with the development plan.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The process of preparing local plans requires extensive local consultation

and is generally subject to government oversight through the conduct
of an examination or inquiry, which will test the alignment of the plan’s
proposals with government policy and their suitability in terms of
addressing local needs and circumstances.

For architects and others involved, the importance of the local development
plan flows from its central role in the determination of planning applications –
a role which has persisted through many detailed changes to the planning
system. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets it out very clearly:
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be

determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material
considerations indicate otherwise.1
Every LPA has a development plan. Some are clear in their content and
produced recently, while others are more dated and may be an assemblage
of ‘saved policies’ from previous plans, which can be confusing
ng iin situations
sing
where local authorities have been merged and a new plan n for the merged
m area
is yet to be completed.
Both the preparation of local plans and the operation

planning applications are shaped by government
EN
decision-making on
tion of decision
ent planning po
policy, set out in
the NPPF.
IM
While recently adopted local plans are likely to be full
fully in accordance with the
porate
orate policies
current NPPF, older plans may incorporate policie which have moved from
being in full accord with governmentent policy by subsequent
ment su policy changes.
EC
rrent governme
Where this is the case, it is current governmen
government policy, as set out in the current
NPPF, which has primacy in the consideration
considerat
considera of development proposals. This
is an area examined in more detail in Chapter
Ch 3, where the guidance focuses
on being clear about thehe planning policies
po and guidelines that proposals will
SP
nst.
st.
be evaluated against.
tional
onal pl
Most LPAs have additional p
planning frameworks in the form of supplementary
planning documents (SPDs),
PD which can either be thematic or area specific
in their coverage, and various forms of guidelines or site-specific guidance.
Very often, for architects, it is this level of detail that provides the material
which most closely guides the design approaches adopted for particular sites.
All these additional frameworks are intended to provide further detail on how
the policies in the development plan should be interpreted and applied and
cannot be used to add or change policy coverage.
In addition to the LPA’s development plan, you may find yourself encountering
a neighbourhood plan covering the area in which you are working. Locally
prepared by a parish council or a Neighbourhood Planning Forum, these plans,
once successfully passed through a local referendum, have to be adopted by
the LPA – at which point they become a part of their local plan coverage of the
specific area involved.
2 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Design and the planning system
1
One of the most difficult areas for anyone working within this system stems
from the section of guidance on the determination of planning applications
that stipulates they must be determined in accordance with the development
plan ‘unless material considerations indicate otherwise’, which prompts a
series of questions:
• Which considerations might indicate that a determination should differ

from accordance with the development plan?
• Are there ‘material considerations’ (i.e. considerations which are relevant
to planning) in a given case? Sometimes it is easier to determine this
aspect by reflecting on issues which are not seen as relevant to planning,
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
such as local trade competition.
• How important are these ‘material considerations’ns in the context of
ntained iin the planning
the development plan and the proposals contained
e,, the more we
application? The greater their importance, weight can be given
to them in the determination process.
the more likely it is to no longer accurately

EN
mplest
Reducing this complex system to its simplest plest terms – tthe older a plan is,
urately current government planning
rately reflect cu
IM
policy. Therefore, the more likely itt is that depart
departures from its policies can be
justified in planning terms.
EC
Design within the

eframework
framewor
Most material in the planning fr framework relates to the ‘what’ and ‘where’
of planning. Whileile architects may be involved in working with and advising
SP
on these aspects
spects of pla
plann
planning, the majority of architectural activity will be
focused on n the ‘how’ didimensions (i.e. the elements of the planning framework
for the area which
hich seek
se to shape/guide appropriate design responses to
development). The
Th ‘how’ dimensions feature at all levels of the planning
system from national to local.
At the national level, guidance on design is provided through the NPPF,

which includes sections on ‘achieving well-designed places’ and ‘conserving
and enhancing the historic environment’, which are particularly relevant
to design. Each of these areas is supported by elements of related online
National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG), which focuses on the practical
interpretation and application of national policy.
The NPPF is structured around the two distinct aspects of planning activity:
• plan-making – the making of planning policy, and

• decision-taking – the determination of planning applications by
reference to policy.
3
In their plan-making activity, LPAs are required to follow and reflect

government policy as expressed in the NPPF. Local plan-making activity
is subject to extensive consultation requirements, which gives the public
generous opportunities for input into the process, allowing them to help shape
the direction and detail of the plan. The final chapter of this guide focuses on
exploiting the opportunities presented by these and other aspects of local
planning policy and guidance making and operation.
As a public process conducted in a democratic context, all these elements

are made publicly accessible and are typically available online through
Government and LPAs’ websites. The difficulty lies in knowing where to look
in order to understand what may, or may not, be in play in terms of policy and
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
guidance locally beyond the local development plan.
A good starting point is to search for the LPA’s Development nt Plan Scheme.
ent S
sition in respe
Every LPA will have one and this will list not just the position respect to any
emerging local plan but also any SPDs that have either
scheduled for preparation.
pre
EN
her been prepar
prepared
It is worth being aware that the Government will review and update both
or are
IM
the NPPF and the NPPG from time to time. Since both are available online,
erring to the cu
it is advisable to check that you are referring current versions of each
document.
EC
The most recent additions to the national guidance on design are the
he stock of natio
National Design Guide, baseded on ten defi
define
defined characteristics of design, and the
National Model Design Code.
ode.. Both form part of the NPPG and provides general
ode
overnment
ernment expe
design guidance on government expectations to steer both LPA plan-making
SP
and decision-making g and in the preparation

ng pr of any local design guidance or
hose to prepare.
codes which they chose prep They are also there to help developers and
their agents prepare proposals
roposa that are likely to be received positively in terms
proposa
sig
i
of their approach to design.
This approach to guidance on design in planning means that it is vital to

establish whether the LPA has its own relatively recently produced local design
guidance in your working area. If not, be aware of and respond to the content
of the National Model Design Code, which will be the Government’s default
guidance in this context.
Many planning policies in the area of design refer to a need to respond to

‘local character’ and a further source of guidance in the ‘how’ of development
will lie in any adopted statements of character in areas in which you are
working. The presence of character statements is far from universal. In
fact, in many LPAs they only exist for conservation areas where they are a
requirement of designation but, even then, may not be in place for conservation
areas that were designated before the requirement came into effect.
4
Design and the planning system
1
Chapter 3 on ‘Principles for approaching the planning system’ and Chapter 6

on ‘Design Statement as a design process tool’ provide extended coverage on
the inclusion of definitions of character as a component of site assessments
forming part of Design Statements in support of applications.
Managing the interface between design and planning
In operating the planning process, planning officers tend to start with national
policy and guidance, working through the local plan and its policies, followed
by any SPDs and local guidelines. This tends to follow a line of thinking from
the ‘what’ and ‘where’ to the ‘how’ of the development process, which is not
dissimilar to the design process that architects and the development/design
nsider
ider
team are likely to follow. The process flows from consideration of whether or
not the selected site is broadly suitable for the development
development,
evelopment through potential
operation of the proposal. EN

approaches to its development, to increasing g levels of detai
In ideal terms, an application and pre-application

e-application
detail in the design and
plication process
pr should be modelled
on this journey from the testing of suitability to consideration
cco of increasing
IM
ved
d through an approach which passes through
levels of detail. It may be achieved
anning
nning consent and the subsequent submission
an application for outline planning
of reserved matters, or through
rough pre-application discussions which, for more
ough pre-appli
EC
complex projects, can move in stages from broad principles to layers and
levels of detail.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
No party is served
ved investment in an application which is insensitive to
ed well by inve
inves
SP
the planningg context and

a is developed in great detail before submission.
wing
ng chapters seek to explore the journey from development
The following
principles to detaile
detailed
etaile design and examine potential planning concerns about
the constructionn and subsequent operation of developments, aimed at helping
design and development teams address issues that are likely to arise at the
stage in the process when they can be most effectively resolved.
5
EN
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IM
EC
SP

2
Do I need planning consent
ns
or any other planning-related
ng-rel
consents? EN
IM
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
This chapter outlines the definition

efinition of ‘development’
‘de and the related need
for planning permission andnd other forms
form of consent under planning laws
EC
and regulations. It explains

xplains the con
concept of ‘permitted development’ (PD)
nto the consta
and offers insight into constantly changing definition of its scope.
Planning
g law and re
regulation
SP
The planning
ning syst
system has a clear legal basis in civil caw, which strays into
criminal law
w in the
t case of listed buildings and scheduled monuments.
The difference reflects the relative seriousness with which breaches of
the law in relation to the protection of listed buildings and scheduled
monuments are viewed.
Architects will rarely, if ever, need to refer directly to the guiding law,
which is both extensive and complex. Planners in their everyday practice
will rarely, if ever, do this either, and will mainly rely on an operating
familiarity with a few key areas, even when dealing with complex appeals.
Substantially originating in the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947,

the legal basis of planning has frequently been revised, with changes
consolidated occasionally in a new Act. The most recent consolidation
was the 1990 Act, which was repealed in parts by the Planning and
Compensation Act 1991 and is now also complemented by the Planning
and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

The most fundamental principles are the need for ‘development’ to secure
planning consent under the legislation and related regulations and the
availability of enforcement powers to address issues where development has
taken place that needed planning consent but does not have it.
The key questions for most architects flowing from this are:
• Is the work ‘development’?

• Is it ‘permitted development’ (i.e. development that is deemed to have
planning permission under the General Permitted Development Order
(GPDO))?
• If the work is development and is not ‘permitted development’, what
planning consents are required?
Planning legislation gives LPAs enforcement powers under der they

er which the
can take action against development which either needs
have planning consent or has not been carried out in
granted consent. In extreme cases, these powers
demolition of unauthorised development. Given
rs extend to req
EN
eds but does not
no
n accordance with
w a
requiring the
ven the potential
potenti implications
potentia
IM
entify and secure
of enforcement action, it is important to identify secu the planning
consent(s) that your project needs.
A useful first point of reference for architects engaging with the planning
chitects enga
EC
Governme website established to

system is the Planning Portal – a UK Government
allow planning applications to o be submitted electronically in England
eloped to provi
and Wales, which has developed provide extensive information about
planning.
SP
Is it development?
ment?
ent?
So, what is development? The definition of development (and some things

which are not considered to be development) is provided by Section 55 of the
Town and Country Planning Act 1990:
Meaning of “development” and “new development”.

(1) Subject to the following provisions of this section, in this Act,
except where the context otherwise requires, “development,”
means the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or
other operations in, on, over or under land, or the making of any
material change in the use of any buildings or other land.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
8
Do I need planning consent or any
other planning-related consents? 2
(1A) For the purposes of this Act “building operations” includes—

(a) demolition of buildings;
(b) rebuilding;
(c) structural alterations of or additions to buildings; and
(d) other operations normally undertaken by a person carrying
on business as a builder.
(2) The following operations or uses of land shall not be taken for the
purposes of this Act to involve development of the land—
im
(a) the carrying out for the maintenance, improvement or other
ch—
alteration of any building of works which—
(i)
EN
affect only the interior of the building, or
(ii) do not materially affect
the building…
ct the external appearance of
IM
NB. Although planning permission sion
ion is not requ
required for works which only the
interior of a Listed Building, itt is still required
requir to get Listed Building consent.
require
EC
Material change
ge
e of use
Most uses of buildings

ildings or lan
land are categorised in the Town and Country
SP
Planning (Use (amendment) (England) Regulations 2020. Knowing

Use Classes) (am
which ‘usee class’ your p
proposal falls under will be important in making any
application forr plann
planning consent and considering the policies which might
apply to it.
The 2020 amendments constitute radical change for those familiar with
previous versions of the Use Classes categorization, dramatically increasing
the flexibility of usage of property in high streets without the need for planning
permission for change of use.
What is important here in terms of whether planning consent is needed is

that, even without any physical changes to a building, changing its use from
one defined use class to another is considered ‘development’. It is helpful to
refer to the Planning Portal, which lists not just the new pattern of Use Classes
introduced from 1 September 2020, but also relates them back to the previous
pattern of Use Class categorization and covers transitional arrangements.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Some changes between use classes are deemed to have permission under
the regulations. These exceptions are complex and have been subject to
9
variation over time. Some allow change in one direction but not in the opposite
direction, while certain changes are subject to limitations of scale or are only
allowed temporarily.
The short path to a reasonably accurate picture is to refer to one or more of the
charts setting out the classes and currently permitted changes available online
from a range of major planning consultancies. Searching for ‘planning use
classes order’ online will take you to accessible material produced by various
organisations. Some of these provide tabulations covering the pre- and post-
September 2020 categorisations, which may prove helpful in understanding
and utilising the increased flexibility that the changes offer.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Is it ‘permitted development’?
The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)

EN
velopment) (En
Order 2015 is the principal order which defines the extent of per
development – commonly referred to as ‘PD’.
(England)
permi
permitted
The Order sets out the classes of development

nt for which a grant of planning
ent
IM
ded
ed that no rest
permission is automatically given, provided re
restrictive condition
is attached and that the development is not exempt from
f the permitted
development rights.
EC
The Order has been, and will be,

e, subject to amendment
am as successive
Governments seek to use it to encourage fufurther modest development and
reduce the need for the planning system to process applications.
SP
Given the complexity tyy of the detail

det o of the rights and the frequency of change,
it is not possible to
o give a brief, accessible and lasting definition of permitted
development. The PD D section of the online Planning Portal provides an
up-to-date definition and nddhhas a link to the Government’s Permitted development
rights for householders: Technical guidance, which contains diagrams that
help to establish the many measurement-based elements of PD in the area of
residential extensions.
In asserting whether proposals might have (or might be shaped to exploit)

PD rights, it is important to check that the proposal is not in an area where
PD rights are limited – most notably conservation areas, national parks
and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) – or where they have
been wholly or partially removed through the designation by the LPA of an
Article 4 (or, less frequently, Article 5) direction – or extended through a
Local Development Order.
Most LPAs have online interactive maps which show the location and extent of
the areas subject to these variations from normal PD rights. Additionally, check
10
the requirements which may come with PD rights to provide prior notification of
work or undertake neighbour consultation.
For architects working on residential extensions, a detailed understanding

of PD in this area can be invaluable. The rights are relatively generous and a
careful exploration of their potential with your clients may help you to shape
proposals that meet the requirements of PD and thereby avoid the need for
planning consent.
The whole area of PD is complex and, even if you are sure of your ground,
certain solicitors might dispute whether or not PD applied and possibly
required consents that were not secured when an extension is under scrutiny in
a future sale.
A safeguard in this context is to apply to the LPA forr a Cert

Certificate of Lawful
pplication
lication fee,
Development of Proposed Works. There is an application fee which is currently
have permitted development rights.

hat
the owner of the property clear evidence that EN
50% of the cost of the equivalent planning application;
pplication; however,
at the propos
how it does give
propose works do indeed
proposed
posals are classed

Even when it is clear that your proposals clas
class as permitted
IM
development, it is always helpful
ful to have discussed
disc
discu proposals with neighbours
to minimise the potential for dispute or cha
chal
challenge and to address any issues
involving working on or close
ose to property boundaries with the need for
EC
party wall agreements.
The Government website sets out

ou broad guidance in the area of party wall
follows
agreements, as follows:
SP
Definition
on
Party walls stand
t on the land of 2 or more owners and either:
• form part of a building
• don’t form part of a building, such as a garden wall
(not wooden fences)
Walls on one owner’s land used by other owners (2 or more) to separate
their buildings are also party walls.
Guidance on work that property owners must tell their neighbours about:
You must tell your neighbour if you want to:
• build on or at the boundary of your 2 properties
• work on an existing party wall or party structure
• dig below and near to the foundation level of their property
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
11
Examples of this type of work include:

• building a new wall
• cutting into a party wall
• making a party wall taller, shorter or deeper
• removing chimneys from a party wall
• knocking down and rebuilding a party wall
Find more details of work you need to tell your neighbour about in the
party wall explanatory booklet.3
Your neighbours can’t stop you from making changes to yourour property
hen your wo
that are within the law, but they can affect how and when works are
carried out.4
Caution regarding permitted development

ment in the ca
cas
case of
EN
IM
listed buildings and scheduled monuments
numents
uments
You may find yourself working on alterations
erations
rations and ex
extensions which constitute
permitted development but where e the building is either listed as a building
EC
of special architectural or historic

ric interest or, much
oric m more rarely, a scheduled
monument.
In these circumstances,, while you would

wou not require planning permission,
SP
you would still need to apply ffor and receive listed building or scheduled
monument consent nt for the works.
works There are no equivalent PD rights in these
work
areas.
A specific note on scheduled monument consent

Scheduled monuments can range from almost invisible archaeological sites
to upstanding historic buildings and structures – the 1880s Swing Bridge
in Newcastle being one of the most unusual examples. While it is possible
that work you are proposing on a scheduled monument might require
planning permission, it will certainly require scheduled monument consent
(SMC). Applications for SMC are handled by central government, not the
LPA, with applications being made directly to the responsible government
department (at the time of writing this is the Department for Digital, Culture,
Media and Sport).
Historic England gives advice to the Government on each application and

administers the consent system. Its website provides some guidance on the
processes involved in this specialist area.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
12
If it is development and not permitted development,

what planning consents might I require?
In addition to straightforward planning permission, there is an extensive

range of other planning-related consents which may be relevant to your
projects. These other consents are numerous, varied and, again, subject to
fine-grained change as successive Governments take steps to reduce planning
requirements in order to encourage and facilitate certain types of development.
The other planning-related consent that architects are most likely to encounter
is listed building consent. This relates to work on a building or structure
included on the List of Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest.
As explained above, there are no PD rights in this areaa and,
rea an essentially,
all work requires consent.
surrounding curtilage and wider setting.

ng.
EN
Contrary to popular understanding, it is the entirety of a lis
int
listed building that is
covered by the listing, which extends to embrace the interior and the building’s
IM
There is no planning fee associated ed with making an application for listed
ted
building consent; however, most ost LPAs charge their standard fees for any
pre-application advice. In manyany instances,
instance the material submitted for an
EC
application for listed building consent iis the same as that submitted for
lding consen
planning permission, but it is import
important to appreciate that these are two
separate applications consents. It is quite possible for the works to be
ons and conse
consen
acceptable for planning
lanning permission
permis purposes but to be unacceptable in terms
of their detailed
led impact
impac on the
th listed building as a heritage asset.
SP
The Planningng Portal provides

ing pro an up-to-date listing of the range of planning and
planning-related
ated consents that might be relevant to your proposals with links
ed con
to online forms and
an related details:
The following planning consents can be applied for online:

• Householder planning consent
• Full planning consent
• Outline planning consent
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
• Reserved Matters
• Listed building consent
• Advertisement consent
13
• Lawful Development Certificate (LDC)

• Notification for prior approval
• Removal/variation of conditions
• Approval (Discharge) of conditions
• Consent under Tree Preservation Orders
• Notification of proposed works to trees in conservation areas
• Application for non-material amendments6
In addition, the Planning Portal provides a further listing of types

pes o
of
application, including ‘hybrid applications’ (covered in more detail in
Chapter 5), that cannot be applied for online.
Permission in principle
EN
IM
The Government website sets out the primary
ry elements of the
t permission in
principle (PIP) consent route:
EC
The permission in principle e consent route is an alternative way of

obtaining planning permission
mission for housing-led
ho development which
eration of matters
separates the consideration matte of principle for proposed
development from the technical detail
d of the development. The
SP
permission in principle
rinciple consent
cons route has 2 stages: the first stage
(or permission in
n principle stage)
s establishes whether a site is suitable
in-principle and the
e second
seco (‘technical details consent’) stage is when
the detailed development proposals are assessed.
… The granting of technical details consent has the effect of granting
planning permission for the development. Other statutory requirements
may apply at this stage such as those relating to protected species or
listed buildings.7
This is effectively a different and simpler approach than the Outline Planning
application process to establishing, in principle, the acceptability of a site
for the defined use – normally housing. The current paths are through an
application to the LPA or through the LPA itself placing the site on Part 2 of
its own Brownfield Land Register. PIP features strongly in the framework for
handling planning consents and delivering development in the Government’s
14 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

proposals for the future of planning. As with so many of these more novel
features of planning, there are detailed exceptions and exemptions. The
Government website provides links to definitions of these and the processes
associated with PIP.
Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness of Proposed Works to a

listed building
An application for a Certificate of Lawfulness of Proposed Works form should be
used to establish whether proposed works to a listed building would be lawful.
If issued, this certificate provides documentary evidence that the LPA holds the
view that the proposals would not affect the character of the listed building as
a building of special architectural or historic interest and, therefore, would not
require listed building consent.
Notifications for prior approval

A condition on certain classes of permitted
ed developmen
an application to the LPA to determine whether
EN
development is the need to submit
hether prior approval
a will be required.
IM
ety net which a
Prior approval is essentially a safety al
allows the LPA to consider
proposals in these classes of PD, their likely im
impacts in regard to certain factors
(e.g. transport and highwayss but in some classes
c can extend to the suitability
d if and how these
of location or siting), and the
t might be mitigated.
EC
nt’ss steadily e
With the Government’s enl
enlarging definition of PD, Prior Approval
will feature more frequently in pl
p
planning activity. It is important to check at
an early stage off work on a proposal
pr which takes advantage of PD rights if
SP
val applies to th
Prior Approval the exercise of these rights.
Work must not comm

comme
commence on the development until the LPA has issued its
n, or tthe time period for it to do so has expired.
determination,
The Planning Portal’s online application system provides for all the current
types of prior approval application.
The Portal particularly offers more detail on the prior approval process for:
• larger home extensions (i.e. single storey rear extensions extending

beyond the rear wall of the original house of over 4m and up to 8m on a
detached house and over 3m and up to 6m on any other house)
• agricultural or forestry developments
• demolition of buildings
• developments for electronic communications networks.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`--- 15
Demolition
Finally, as highlighted above, it is necessary to address the issue of whether
you might need consent or make an application for Prior Approval for any
associated demolition, in addition to requiring planning consent(s) for
your development.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Despite not being listed among the types of application, the Planning Portal
does provide guidance in this area; however, it only relates to situations in
England and different arrangements apply in Wales.
The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)

op
(England) Order 2015 (as amended) – Schedule 2, Part 11,, Cla
Class B:
Although such works are known as ‘permitted

EN
[The ‘Application for Prior Notification of Proposed Demolition’ for
ding or struct
should be used for proposals to demolish a building
opment’ rights.
the demolition is covered by ‘permitted development’ rights
itted developm
form]
structure where
development’, before
IM
you can carry out the demolition you must ust apply to the
th local planning
require for the method of
authority to see if its prior approval will be required
toration of the site.
demolition and any proposed restoration
EC
The purpose of this control iss to give local p

planning authorities the
opportunity to regulate the e details of demolition
dem in order to minimise
vity on local amenity.
the impact of that activity am
Before proceeding, you should first
fir establish if the demolition is covered
SP
evelopment’ rights. If it is not, then a different type of

by ‘permitted development’
application mayy be required.
required Your local planning authority will be able
to advise you.
See summary below or view full official government guidance on the
consent regimes around demolition and when permission is required on
Gov.uk.8
• Conservation areas – Any demolition within a conservation area
is further restricted and will require an ‘Application for planning
permission for relevant demolition in a conservation area’ unless
it meets certain criteria. See full details on Gov.uk.9
• Pubs or other drinking establishments (Use classes A4 or AA)
– An application for full planning permission is required to
demolish pubs or other drinking establishments (including those
with expanded food provision)
16
• Listed buildings and scheduled ancient monuments – These are

covered by different legislation and will require a different type
of application.
Additionally, permitted development rights do not apply where
demolition is:
• on land which is the subject of planning permission for its
redevelopment, granted on an application, or deemed to
be granted
• required or permitted to be carried out by or under any
enactment
• required to be carried out by virtue of a relevant
vant obligation.
EN
It is often helpful to discuss your proposal with your local planning
authority before you submit your application
application advice. Your local planning
ation – this is known as pre-
ng authority w
details of how to go about this on its own
will normally have
website 10
wn website.
IM
Demolition is another area where
here the Gove
Gov
Government has recently made changes
iver new homes
with the intention to deliver home and revitalize town centres through
the introduction of a new Class ZA PD right. This gives combined PD rights,
proval, for dem
subject to Prior Approval, demolition of certain types of buildings and their
replacement by a single purpos
purpose-built detached block of flats, or a purpose-
built detachedd house.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
her
er recent cha
As with other ch
changes, it is subject to complex eligibility provisions
which are set
et out on the Government website. (The Town and Country Planning
tte Development) (England) (Amendment) (No. 3) Order 2020).
(General Permitted
KEY QUESTIONS
1. Are you clear on whether your proposals constitute

“development”?
2. If your proposals are relatively small scale, are they “permitted
development”? If not, could they be refined to fall within the
dimensions and other features associated with the definition of
PD to avoid the need to make a planning application?
3. If your proposals are PD, is it a type which requires
“Notification for Prior Approval”?
17
4. If they are PD, would your client benefit from a Certificate

of Lawful Development to provide legal certainty on the
planning status of the development?
5. Are you clear on any other planning related consents which
might be required e.g. Listed Building Consent or Scheduled
Monument Consent?
6. Do the provisions of Permission in Principle apply to the
character of development you are proposing? If so, would there
be benefits to your client in using this route to planning consent?
7. Are you clear on whether consent is required for any aspects of
your proposals which involve demolition?
EN
IM
EC
SP
18 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

3
Principles for approaching the
planning system
th
EN
IM
This chapter outlines principles
iples designed to help maximise the potential
for successful applications. s. It assesses what the planning system is
EC
looking for across the e various stages

stage of the design development process
and introduces tips and tools to help at each stage. The importance of
having a well-informed
nformed and we well-focused conversation with the LPA about
your proposalsls is highlighte
highlighted. This may involve informal conversations
SP
with planning
ning officers
office or more formal discussions within the framework of
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
application consultation
the pre-application c process operated by many LPAs and, in
most cases,
es, subje
subject to a sliding scale of fees and requirements regarding
the minimum m documentary
do material provision required.
It is recognised that these conversations will be conducted in the context

of a stretched and often under-resourced planning system, which may find
it difficult to engage with and respond to an applicant both prior to and
during the application consideration process.
The guidance aims to make this process as effective as possible through

setting out the applicant’s part of the conversation in a way that is
accessible and helpful to planners. It will facilitate the planners’ response
or, alternatively, will allow the points being made to be seen to be as
clear and constructive as possible should the conversation prove to be
one-sided.

Principles
Principle 3.1: Understand what the planning system is looking for

across the various stages in the design development process
The RIBA Plan of Work 2020 (see Appendix B) sets out a clear flow of design
development and delivery, with levels of detail and commitment increasing as
the process progresses.
Stage 0 ‘Strategic Definition’ is when many fundamental planning-related

issues are likely to be addressed:
• What is the project trying to do?

her ways
• Could the project objectives be better delivered in other ways, e.g.
through building conversion?
• What is important about the location?
An understanding of the planning context of the

he suggested
EN
site and building
uggested si
ng
use can be enormously helpful in anticipatingg likely points of conflict and
IM
creating a clearer path through the planning
ning
ng process.
Planning features in a number of placesaces

ces in the RIBA
RIB Plan of Work 2020. Under
EC
‘Core Tasks’ it is recognised that there may be a need for a Project Strategy
covering planning. Planning iss specifically covered
co in the bar relating to
‘Core Statutory Processes’, with general ob o
observations about what actions
in respect of planning are e most likely to occur within specific Plan of Work
re
stages. However, the supportin
supporting text reflects the nuanced approach that
SP
can often be needed d or advisable

ed advisab in responding to differing project and
planning contexts:
Planning legislation, policy and procedure is an ever increasingly

complex part of the development process. Good planning is inseparable
from good design and vice versa. Assessing planning issues should not
be left to Stage 3 but be evaluated from the outset of every commission.
For example, will the Client Requirements be acceptable under planning
policy? If not, there is no value in developing design solutions for a
proposal that is unlikely to gain consent. The Client Team must ensure
adequate resources are allocated and appointments are made to
manage planning issues throughout the project. This applies to both
pre and post planning submission.1
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,
20
Principles for approaching
the planning system 3
The underlying principles of seeking to ensure appropriate understanding

of and action on planning issues at the necessary stages in the design and
development process are crucial and form the heart of this guide.
In the NPPF, the Government encourages early engagement with planning.

The design process tends to work on the basis of the establishment of
strategic elements of a design, which is then tested and developed in
increasing levels of detail. In ideal terms, the interface with the planning
process should work in parallel.
When you look at local plans, guidelines and other supplementary planning
documents, you will see completed and detailed documents; however, these
documents have generally been developed from a set of strategic objectives
and worked through to achieve the necessary level off de
detail.
Well-structured documents combined with yourr careful reading

readi of the
subsequent detail.
EN
documents should allow you to extract the strategic elements
trategic elemen
ele which drive them
hese while developing
and give greater certainty in addressing these deve
dev and discussing
IM
Pre-application consultation and planning perfo
performance agreements, both
perfor
iss chapter, sho
of which are covered later in this shou
should proceed on this basis – i.e.
as a conversation which achieves
eves clarity, an
ieves and hopefully agreement, on the
strategic elements beforee time and energ
ener
energy is invested in the development of
EC
dependent detail.
Paragraph 7 of the e NPPF clearly states

s that the ‘purpose of the planning system
e to the achieve
is to contribute achievement of sustainable development’. The RIBA has
SP
published a Sustainab outcomes guide to help architects define and develop

Sustainable ou
ribution
bution to sus
their contribution su
sustainable development through sustainable design.
Paragraph 131 31 of the
th NPPF indicates that in ‘determining applications, great
weight should be g given to outstanding or innovative designs which promote
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
high levels of sustainability, or help to raise the standard of design more

generally in an area, so long as they fit in with the overall form and layout of
their surroundings’.
With many local authorities having declared climate emergencies, approaches

to design which are clearly focused on improving sustainability performance
should, in theory, be much more readily welcomed and supported by LPAs.
In this context, it is worth looking for indicators of political and policy
commitment by the local authority with which you are interacting. You can
then play back this commitment to the LPA, clearly setting out how your
design approach contributes to sustainable design and development as part
of the justification for your proposals. With the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals being increasingly referred to in organisational and policy
circles, you may want to emphasise specific ways in which your proposals
21
relate to these. This is particularly important where there is a gulf between

the climate emergency position adopted by the local authority and the
willingness in practice to recognise and accept the implications for design in
the determination of planning applications.
Principle 3.2: Test the broad likelihood of success of your project

at the earliest possible stage
Zoning and code-based planning systems used in other countries provide
very early stage certainty on the planning acceptability of proposals. However,
the UK’s discretionary system is based on the principle of the primacy of the
development plan, subject to other ‘material considerations’, which can inject
uncertainty into the process.
Much time and energy can be expended in pursuit of development

elopment
lopment proposals
which might not secure planning consent – either from the LPA, or on appeal –
or which have no realistic prospect of securing consent.
ent.
Pre-application discussions are the most widelyy used approach

ract maximum value
water on potential development. To help extract
approac for testing the
v from these
EN
IM
discussions, it is suggested that they are used as one ele
element of the three-part
opment proposition
testing of the likely success of a development proposi – to answer the
question ‘Will it fly?’.
EC
The three elements that are central

ntral to the ‘Wil
‘Will it fly?’ question are:
ter and capacity of the site

• clarity on the character
• clarity on the keyy aspects planning policy affecting its use and
spects of pla
SP
development
• clarity on the developer’s
develope requirements of the development.
The interplay of these three aspects is explored later in this chapter, in the
section on ‘Tools and processes’.
Principle 3.3: Understand the planning history of your site

In common with many other dimensions of the law, planning is significantly
driven by precedent. National and local policy can and will change over time,
sometimes significantly, more frequently only marginally. Examining the
planning history of your site and of the area around it can be very helpful in
considering the potential acceptability of your proposals. It will alert you to
potential resistance, evidenced by past refusals, or encourage you through
evidence of approval of past proposals with similarities to yours.
Searching your site and the area around it is generally straightforward in

the case of most, if not all, LPAs, which have online interactive map-based
22 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

registers of past and current planning applications. These generally provide

links to all the documentation relating to an application – from the original
application (though generally not including any pre-application material),
through consultation response to the final officer report and recommendation.
This will be followed by the decision, including the conditions applied, and the
heads of terms if not the full details of any related Section 106 Agreement.
Principle 3.4: Be clear on what your application will be evaluated

against
This should be simple and obvious but, in practice, is often an area of great
uncertainty for architects. While most will have a good working familiarity
with the Building Regulations, many struggle with the equivalent regulatory
framework on the planning side of design.
anning policy through the NPPF,

The Government sought to simplify national planning
most recently updated in 2019. The framework
within them and in the resultant determination

mination
EN
ork guides LLPAs in the preparation
ducting detailed
of their local plans, in preparing and conducting detaile planning policy
planning applications. In
nation of pla
erationally
rationally inter
turn, the NPPF is supported and operationally inte
interpreted in a suite of guidance
IM
documents – the National Planning ng Practice Guidance
ing G
Gu (NPPG).
The NPPF and NPPG include e considerable coverage

c of the Government’s
expectations of design within the plan
plann
planning system – across plan-making and
EC
on 12 of the NPPF
decision-taking. Section NP (Achieving well-designed places)
ection
ction of the online
and the ‘Design’ section on
o NPPG clearly set out the expectations.
Planners should
d be referring to these as the primary sources of guidance,
support and validation of th
the
their work.
SP
ort
rt of call for architects
The first port a in developing proposals which need to go
through the planning
annin system should be a good working knowledge of these
PPF and the related NPPG.
areas of the NPPF
The other main bases of evaluation will be the local plan for the area in which
you are applying and any additional adopted local guidance. This additional
material is generally in the form of supplementary planning documents
(SPDs) or adopted guidelines (often covering particular development types,
such as ‘extending your home’), masterplans or strategies. The local plan,
SPDs and guidelines should be readily accessible on each LPA’s website,
and can typically be accessed through the planning section of the council’s
website by working your way down the planning policy part of this section of
the website.
When going through the lists of LPA material, note the date that each
document was published. The older the document, the less relevance it will
have in relation to government policy and guidance in the event of any conflict.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`--- 23
The material you will access by this route is extensive and much of it will be
peripheral to the context of your proposals.
Pre-application consultation is particularly helpful in narrowing the focus onto

those limited parts of this material which are most relevant.
Principle 3.5: Be clear on any parts of the context and policy status
of your site which may be of major significance
Having a site in a flood risk zone, in or close to a designated or non-designated
heritage asset or in an area with any protective designation (which may range
from the conservation of wildlife or habitats, such as Sites of Special Scientific
Interest (SSSIs) and Sites of Local Conservation Importance (SLCIs), to the
conservation of employment floorspace through Strategic Industrial
dus
us Land
tss developability
(SIL) designation) will have a significant impact on both its develop and
approaches to its development. The map part of the LPA’s A’s local plan should
help you to identify factors of this nature.
Principle 3.6: Be clear on how your application

ication
ation is like
likely to be
EN
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
determined
IM
Decisions on the determination of a high
gh proportion of
o planning applications
ning
ng officers rath
are now formally delegated to planning ra
rather than being made by
mmittees or th
councillors through planning committees thei
their equivalent. This delegation
EC
ned ‘scheme of delegation’.

will be managed within a defined
If you have been strugglingng with officer views

v on your proposals, and feel
you have a strong case e for
or consent giv
given your understanding of the policy
SP
hould
ould be guiding
framework which should gu
guidin the determination, you may want to try to
plication
lication is re
ensure that the application referred to committee for decision. Throughout
this chapter we touchh on a nnu
number of ways in which you might encourage, and
efer
f
hopefully secure, the referral of your application to committee.
Referral, first, opens the possibility that the committee, or individual members,
might be more supportive than the officers. Second, it offers the possibility of
putting your case in support of the proposals directly to the committee before
they make their decision. Understanding the exemptions to delegation in the
LPA’s scheme of delegation may help to secure the referral of an application
to committee.
LPAs generally include their particular scheme of delegation on their website,

outlining the circumstances in which applications must be determined by
committee rather than by officers, and also the circumstances in which
officers should not use their delegated powers, but instead refer the
application to committee.
24
The exemptions will vary depending on the LPA, so you will need to check
with the specific authority concerned. You will generally be able to find this
information by searching for the term ‘scheme of delegation’ or, alternatively,
access it through the LPA’s constitution – the document which sets out all the
details of how the LPA conducts its business – or by searching the planning
component of its website.
As an example, the scheme of delegation adopted and used by Newcastle City

Council is typical in its listing of factors which may cause an application to
be referred to committee. Highlighted in red below are the areas which often
demand the most attention and work.
Factors to be taken into account by delegated officers

cers in deciding
whether a planning application should be determined
termined b by Planning
Committee:
1. Whether a Councillor, applicantt or other perso
interest has, within the statutory
ry publicity period,
p
EN
person with a significant
requested
in writing with reasons that
at the matter be
b determined by
IM
Committee. In all such cases, the delegated
de officer must liaise
with the Chair and Vice Chair in relation
r to the request.
esirable that representations
2. Whether it is desirable rep for and/or against a
EC
developmentt proposal shoshould be heard by the Committee. In all

quests for such
cases of requests s hearings, the delegated officer must
liaise with the Chair and
a Vice Chair in relation to the request.
he impact of
3. The o the development on communities, businesses or
SP
individuals.
he number,
4. The numb strength and issues raised in public
representations.
5. Whether there are significant national planning policy or
development plan implications raised in the proposal.
6. Whether formal Environmental Impact Assessment is involved.
7. The scale and/or complexity of the development.
8. The characteristics and sensitivity of the site or adjacent sites,
including amenity and heritage considerations.
9. The nature of the planning history and the history of previous
Committee involvement.
10. Whether Council owned land is involved and it is prudent and in
the public interest that the decision is taken by Committee.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
25
11. Whether the matter is likely to involve either a fine balance

between alternative decisions or disputed/uncertain matters of
fact or law which ought in the interests of natural justice to be
considered by Committee.
12. Whether there are any legal consequences arising from the
determination of the application which are of such significance
that they ought to be considered by Committee.
13. Whether there are any other factors which indicate a Committee
decision to be appropriate.2
Human nature and extensive experience both suggest that att individu
individuals
and organisations are more likely to register objections s than support
for development which affects them. It is common, therefore,
herefore, tha
representations made are most likely to be in opposition
proposals. If the objections are reflected in a recommendation
that any
a
development
position to deve
mmendatio to refuse, the
recommendatio
EN
application will normally not be referred to committee because the report and
ommittee beca
IM
recommendation are responding to expressedessed
ssed concern
concern.
Gaining appreciation of your proposal’s al’s merit from the local ward councillor
sal’s
EC
is helpful in this context. While they

hey may understand
unde
unders the concerns of their
constituents adjacent to your site, they will hhopefully appreciate the wider
benefits which can be generated
erated by your proposal
p in their area. In finely
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
balanced applications, localocal council member

me support can be invaluable –
both in getting the application
pplication referred
referr to committee and in how discussion
SP
proceeds in committee.
ittee.
ttee.
Council websites provide

vide
de det
details which will help you to identify councillors.
A ward boundaries map shows
sh which ward your proposal is located within
and you can access a list of councillors and their contact details by ward.
You can also access lists of the LPA’s committee and its membership, past
and future committee meeting dates and the papers from past meetings of
the committees.
One important factor to remember is that ward councillors who are also
members of the planning or development management committees involved
in the determination of planning applications will be wary concerning their
involvement with applications and applicants or their agents in advance of
determination. They have a legal requirement not to enter the decision-making
process with any predetermined views. In this context, while it is useful to
familiarise them with your application and its merits, a ward councillor who is
not on the decision-making committee may be a more effective ally.
26
Principle 3.7: Getting an opportunity to present your case

If you have been able to get your application referred to committee for
decision, there is the possibility that you can make your case in support of the
application at a hearing. This is often the best means of securing a reasonable
discussion of the merits of your proposal with the decision-makers in public
before a decision is made. Such a discussion may result in a recommendation
to refuse being overturned, or the application being deferred to allow a
site visit to take place, during which committee members can gain a better
understanding of the proposals in context, or a suggestion that the application
be deferred to allow specific issues to be addressed.
If your application is referred to committee for decision, standard local

authority procedures require that a report on it, including
din a recommendation
udin
and any associated conditions, be published as part of the agenda and papers
for the committee meeting. This must be published LPA at least five
shed by the LP
EN
working days before the committee meeting
that you are aware of the committee meeting

g and should be viewable on the
LPA’s website. If you know that your application
ication is going to committee, ensure
lication
and view the report at the
ting date an
earliest possible opportunity. If appropriate,
ropriate, put in
propriate, i your request to speak in
IM
support of the application.
Principle 3.8: Make the

e most of an o
opportunity to speak
EC
Most hearings will only lyy allow you to sspeak in support of the application if a
lication has b
hearing on the application bee requested by consultees (although, it is
been
advisable to check
eck
ck the particular
particula LPA’s protocols with regard to hearings).
end
Consultees tendnd to request a hearing only if there is strong objection to a
SP
proposal andnd a fear tha

that ththe LPA might grant consent. They rarely request a
hearing too support an a application. The LPA’s protocols for hearings, in addition
to the circumstances
mstance
tance in which hearings will be allowed, will determine the
qu
timetable for requests and the rules by which the hearing, if granted, will be
conducted. An important element in the conduct of hearings is likely to be a
rigidly enforced and generally brief speaking period.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
In preparing your brief statement, you should:

• be clear on the time limit
• rehearse the delivery of your statement to make sure that you can
deliver it within the allotted period – with a little time to spare
• make a limited number of key points and be sure that these are
focused on planning issues
• close with a strong list of reasons why the committee should
support the application.
27
Ensure that you are clear on the main points that the report is making and the
biggest areas of concern and be prepared to strongly rebut them. To help boost
your case, draw on anything you can find from the committee’s or the LPA’s
delegated handling of any recent applications with similarities to yours (which
can often be found on the LPA’s website or via the local press). Local press is
particularly helpful as a means of gauging committee and member concerns.
Principle 3.9: Understand which other parties could be involved,

whether in support or opposition
Regulations require LPAs to consult all immediate neighbours. The depth of
consultation can be extended if it is considered that a proposal will have a
wider effect. Engaging with neighbours and others who may be affected in
rage
advance of submitting the application can be helpful. Coveragege of
o discussions
with them, any modifications made in response to these and any ex expressions
Most LPA websites allow you to track consultation

on.
tion responses a
EN
of support secured should be included in the material submitted with the
application to help you build a successful application.
as these come
ocuments
cuments unde
into the local authority and are posted as documents under your application
IM
number. In some instances, LPAs do not post ost consultation
consultati
consulta responses online.
quest copies. Vi
If this is the case, you may need to request V
Viewing consultation
responses allows you to get a feel for the location and the nature of the
EC
reaction to your application. It may help you consider

con
co changes to the
proposals which would remove vee or reduce obj
objections. It also helps you to
prepare responses, should d you have the opportunity
o to address the planning
eparation
paration of a su
committee, or in the preparation s
supplementary statement submitted as
SP
additional material to o counter objec

o
objections.
If there are active community

ommunity o organisations in the application area, such
as a parish council orr reside
eside
residents association, consider approaching them
in advance of submitting g the application and, if appropriate, presenting
your proposals to them in draft form. An openness to their concerns and a
willingness to adapt proposals could turn objectors into neutral observers,
who are unlikely to object, or even into positive supporters of your proposals.
Whatever the outcome, record the process and your response to local reactions
as this information can form a valuable part of any statement that you submit
in support of the application – and the material that you include in your
presentation in any hearing.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Beyond community organisations, local press can give you a picture of

community interests and concerns to help you identify potential supporters
and likely opponents. Direct contact with these sources allows you not only
to understand, address and head off concerns or maximise potential support,
but also to adapt your proposal to address concerns before they are raised.
28
The local press can be a helpful supporter if you find they are running
campaigns, columns or article series in relation to your proposal, or proposals
like it in the area in which you are working. You may find that they will help
by contributing information or even by running stories. The question to ask
is: what are the good news or novel aspects of your proposals that the local
press might be interested in – and how might these be fed into their articles
or features?
The value to hard-pressed planners of well-prepared material in accessible

language cannot be overstated and this message applies equally to the local
press, for whom good copy is invaluable.
Tools and processes
Tool 1: Pre-application consultation

EN
Pre-application consultation is encouraged
ed by the Gover
NPPF as a basis for improving understanding
anding
Government in the
planning dimensions
ding of the pl
p
otentially addressing,
of proposals and identifying, and potentially addre issues before
IM
applications are submitted.
Most LPAs offer a range of pre-application

e-application services
re-application s with a suite of related
charges. They also request
st or require varying
va amounts of information before
EC
they progress the consultation.

sultation. Being familiar with the individual LPA’s
requirements helpss you to asses
assess the point at which you are best prepared to
s.
enter the process.
SP
g the process,
In initiating proces chcheck the likely timescale and scope of response.
Some LPAss have extended
extend response periods, others may not be able to
guarantee to o include observations from consultees whose input may be of
vital importancece to
t the performance of the project. Awareness of these factors
involving delay or uncertainty, despite engaging in the pre-application process,
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
may prompt you to bypass pre-application and simply progress straight to

submission of an application with a willingness to amend it to address issues
as they emerge during the processing of the application.
If you are a regular applicant to particular LPAs, you will develop a sense of
the quality and value of their pre-application services. Getting involved with
any planning service user groups will allow you to share other applicants’
experiences and, potentially, collectively press for improvement if services are
not strong, speedy or reliable.
One area of major concern with pre-application responses from LPAs is the
frequent lack of critical focus. Many responses include an extensive listing of
all the LPA’s planning policies which may have a bearing on the consideration
29
of the application. While all of these may indeed have some bearing, there
will almost inevitably be a small number of policies which are of fundamental
importance to the particular application on the particular site. Being able
to identify and reflect on the implications of these is central to the further
development and progression of your application.
The ‘Will it fly?’ process detailed below suggests how applicants might,
if needed, encourage LPAs to structure their pre-application responses to
identify these fundamentally important policies.
Tool 2: The ‘Will it fly?’ test

To expand on Principle 3.2, this tool brings together three important factors
use very
in the ‘airworthiness’ or otherwise of a project and is ideally used
early in the design development process – most usefully at Stage age 0 in the
RIBA Plan of Work 2020.
produce long lists of policies which will be relevant

nsultation
vant
sultation resp
Experience suggests that many pre-application consultation EN responses
nt to the cons
the eventual application but fail to highlight the limited num
consideration of
number of policies
IM
that will make a critical difference to the acceptability
cceptability or otherwise
o of
the proposals.
Similarly, many plan policies refer to ‘responding to/in sympathy with/in

EC
he area’ without
keeping with the character of the withou actually defining this ‘character’
anywhere.
ks to pool efforts
The ‘Will it fly?’ tool seeks effor to provide a more narrowly focused
SP
understanding of these ese two areas

are as a base for considering whether the core
requirements of the he
e developmen
developme
development brief for the project can reasonably be
osen
satisfied on the chosensen site.
Many LPAs publish a list of material that needs to be submitted in advance of

a pre-application discussion. The suggestion is that you should try to reach
an agreement with the LPA in preparation for a pre-application consultation
on sharing the preparation of various elements. The architect prepares
and submits a detailed assessment of the site and relevant elements
of its immediate and wider context, together with an outline of the core
development requirements.
In return, the LPA responds with an endorsement or refinement of the character

assessment, highlighting the key policies which would shape their response to
the core development requirements on the proposed site. If this trade-off can
be achieved it will allow the pre-application discussion, and the advice derived
from it, to be much more clearly focused on key issues and much more helpful
in progressing the project.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
30
Taking this approach should enable identification in planning terms of the basic
suitability of the site for the proposed development content at an early stage.
If it is possible to construct a triangle between the three elements of the

‘Will it fly?’ test – site evaluation, key policy requirements and key development
requirements – the result should be a proposal that is workable in planning
and development terms. The discussions from this point on should then be
about details rather than principles.
RE
ION
KE IRE
QU
AT
Y P ME
LU
OL NT
VA
ICY S
EE
SIT
Figure 3.1: ‘Will it fly?’ triangle

EN
KEY DEVELOPMENT
MEN
MENT
REQUIREMENTS
MENTS
IM
ice
Applying this approach in practice e has proved helpful in providing early
confidence about the successs of development
developme proposals – and in other cases
ersations with d
has prompted initial conversations development clients concerning
EC
conflicts between perceived

eived or presented
presen core requirements and the evaluation
of site character and capacity or ke
key planning policies. In these cases,
fundamental decisions
sions can be made
m to refine requirements or to consider a
different site.
SP
Tool 3: Planning
anning per
perfo
performance agreements
Planning performance
forman
orman agreements are arrangements that are voluntarily
entered into between applicants and LPAs as a management tool for
progressing applications. They are subject to a charge by the LPA, reflecting
the administrative input. You may have heard of these and think that they
would only relate to large and complex applications (and, in practice, most
LPAs will presume this too). However, the Government’s guidance on their
use indicates that it is possible to use a simple form of agreement for smaller
schemes, based on the key milestones that need to be adhered to.
A planning performance agreement is a project management tool

which the local planning authorities and applicants can use to agree
timescales, actions and resources for handling particular applications.
It should cover the pre-application and application stages but may also
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
31
extend through to the post-application stage. Planning performance

agreements can be particularly useful in setting out an efficient and
transparent process for determining large and/or complex planning
applications. They encourage joint working between the applicant
and local planning authority, and can also help to bring together
other parties such as statutory consultees. A planning performance
agreement is agreed voluntarily between the applicant and the local
planning authority prior to the application being submitted, and can be
a useful focus of pre-application discussions about the issues that will
need to be addressed.3
The principle is that, in return for the payment and the applicant’s
plicant’s agreement
a
to provide specified information by specified programme me dates, the LLPA
commits to responses and actions on agreed specified
particularly helpful in establishing commitment to
of organisations which the LPA will need to use
This is
fied dates. Th
programme from a range
o the programm
e ass consultees.
consultees
EN
IM
If increased certainty on development programming
ogramming
gramming is imimportant to the project,
it can be beneficial to approach the LPA
A to explore tthe use of a planning
performance agreement.
EC
Tool 4: Supporting statements

ments
ents
Planning Statements, Heritage Stat
Statements, Design and Access
Statements – and combinations
mbinations of these
SP
In the past, planning

ng
g regulations
regulation have required the submission of Design
and Access Statementsnts with almost
ents a all planning applications. Currently,
they are only required for a limited range of applications, as set out in
government guidance:
• Applications for major development, as defined in article 2 of

the Town and Country Planning (Development Management
Procedure) (England) Order 2015.
• Applications for development in a designated area, where the
proposed development consists of:
▪ one or more dwellings; or
▪ a building or buildings with a floor space of 100 square
metres or more.
• Applications for listed building consent.4
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,
32
In connection with the wider requirements, CABE (the New Labour

Government’s Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment)
produced some clear guidance in its publication Design and Access
Statements: How to write, read and use them. This is still available online
through the CABE archive.5
LPAs may well require a Planning Statement as part of their validation

requirements. If the application relates to a ‘heritage asset’, they are likely also
to require a Heritage Statement. The specific circumstances may dictate that a
Design and Access Statement is also a formal requirement.
Heritage assets can be varied and have different degrees of protection and
weight in the planning process. The main distinction is between designated
form
orm designation, and
heritage assets, which have one form or another of formal
ormal des
non-designated heritage assets, which have no formal designation but some
heritage value to the LPA.
What are the different types of designated

esignated herit
heritage assets?
E
IM
hich has bee
Listed building – a building which been designated because of
its special architectural orr historic interest
inter and (unless the list entry
udes not onl
indicates otherwise) includes only the building itself but also:
EC
• any object or structure fixe

fixed to the building
• any object
ject or structur
structure within the curtilage of the building which,
ugh not fixed to the building, forms part of the land and has
although
SP
done so since
sin before 1 July 1948.
led monu
Scheduled monument – a monument which has been designated
because off its n
national importance.
Protected wreck site – the site of a vessel lying wrecked on or in the sea
bed, designated because of the historical, archaeological or artistic
importance of the vessel, or of any objects contained or formerly
contained in it.
Registered park or garden – a designed landscape which has been
designated because of its special historic interest.
Registered battlefield – a battlefield which has been designated
because of its special historic interest.
World heritage site – a cultural and/or natural heritage site inscribed
because of its outstanding universal value.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
33
Conservation area – an area which has been designated because of its

special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of
which it is desirable to preserve or enhance.
What are non-designated heritage assets?
Non-designated heritage assets are buildings, monuments, sites,
places, areas or landscapes identified by plan-making bodies as having
a degree of heritage significance meriting consideration in planning
decisions but which do not meet the criteria for designated heritage
assets.
A substantial majority of buildings have little or no heritage significance
and thus do not constitute heritage assets. Only a minorityy ha
have
enough heritage significance to merit identification ass non-designated
non desi
heritage assets.6
Non-designated heritage assets are generallyy identified by LPAsL in the form

EN
ocal plans or elsewhere
of ‘local lists’ which are included in their local els
el on their
IM
websites.
It is important to underline the value

ue of making th the case to the LPA about the
EC
ements. All of these

virtues of integrating these statements. tth aspects impact upon and
interrelate with each other. Heritage
eritage conside
considerations influence design, and both
ship with wider planning issues.
will have a critical relationship
ment, you can choose

In shaping your statement, c to establish clear sections which
SP
focus on material that

hat is particu
particula
particularly relevant to design or to heritage. This will
onsultees to readily identify the material that relates to their
enable individual consultees
core area of concern – but, crucially,
c embedding the material into the wider
statement should enable them to see their area of concern in the wider context
of the remainder of the issues that shape and justify the application.
Design Statements are of enormous value to architects, both in working

through the planning process and in terms of their potential use:
• as a design process tool

• as a negotiating tool
• as an audit trail of the design process and planning negotiations, should
the proposal be heading towards a planning appeal.
Tool 5: Design review

The UK Government clearly encourages the use of design review and other
design process tools in the NPPF:
34 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

129. Local planning authorities should ensure that they have access
to, and make appropriate use of, tools and processes for assessing
and improving the design of development. These include workshops to
engage the local community, design advice and review arrangements,
and assessment frameworks such as Building for Life.7 These are of
most benefit if used as early as possible in the evolution of schemes,
and are particularly important for significant projects such as large
scale housing and mixed use developments. In assessing applications,
local planning authorities should have regard to the outcome from
these processes, including any recommendations made by design
review panels.8
If you are dealing with a proposal that seems too be challengi

challenging to the LPA in
EN
ouraging your
the area of design, you might consider encouraging you client
p
cl
proposal to a local, regional or national design review panel.
to refer the
Design Council (a partial successor to CABE) offers design review through

IM
panels drawn from a wide range off national expe expertise. At the level of the former
Government Regions, there are e organisatio
organisations that run design review panels
hrough
which are interconnected through ough the Design
Desi
De Network. Many towns, cities
EC
and London boroughs have ave their own panels.

p With the loss of publicly funded
design review services, s, virtually all panels
p now charge for their services and
will operate a scale e of fees for a vva
varying range of services, even if they are run
fit basis.
on a not-for-profit basis
SP
he value and effectiveness

Critical to the eff of design review in the suite of
government-endorsed
nt-endorsed
t-endorsed tools
t are a number of factors, some of which are
N
NP particularly:
highlighted in the NPPF,
• timing – ideally, early enough in the design process to allow it to assist

in the fundamentals of the design approach at a stage in the design
development process when there is sufficient time and capacity to
explore options. It should not be at the tail end of the process, when
the scale of investment of time and resources in the project effectively
precludes this and limits discussion to minor and often cosmetic
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
refinement
• the need for LPAs to have due regard for the outcome of processes and
the recommendations made by design review panels.
So, you will need to ensure that you are getting the timing of a referral to review
right and assure yourself that the LPA that you are working with has a record of
handling the outcome of design reviews appropriately.
35
Most review panels conduct their business openly where proposals are already
in the public domain. Most will also offer services in confidence if applicants
are not yet ready to put their early stage proposals into the public domain. To
assess how individual LPAs handle the outcomes of review, you can ask the
organisers of the review panel for a list of schemes that they have reviewed and
search the LPA’s website for material on them.
Schemes which have been through design review are likely to have relatively
extensive related material on the planning application part of the website,
including the officer report on the final application, which should feature the
record of observations from design review. It may include coverage of how this
supports the officer recommendations or how the design has been amended in
light of the review.
Finding no reference to reviews that you know have taken place, or design
scourage you from
review observations being regularly dismissed, may discourage f using
design review in this context. However, with both the
LPAs to have regard to the outcomes being stated d in Governmen EN
and tthe need for
e process an
Government policy, it can
still be worth referring to design review if you feel that an app
application may be
refused and your clients will subsequently takeake it to appea
appeal
appeal. In this context,
IM
a positive outcome from design review willl be very helpful
helpfu
hel at appeal.
One further factor in considering referral

rral to a design
ferral desig review panel is the
desi
breadth of expertise available to it through its panel
p membership. Most
EC
organisations have access to a very wide rang range of experts from a variety of
disciplines. From their pooll of panellists, tthey tend to select a panel that is
specifically shaped to the e nature of the proposal they will be reviewing. You
may be working on a project which is particularly challenging in the area of
SP
heritage or highwayy issues. Ask yoyour panel organiser for a listing of their range
of expertise and, iff appropriate
appropriate, ask for assurance that the particular areas of
expertise which you see being important will be brought into play in the
ee as b
ts for your review.
selection of the panellists
KEY QUESTIONS
1. Have you tested the broad likelihood of success?

a. Have you assessed the character and capacity of the site?
b. Have you identified the key aspects of planning status and
planning policy affecting its use and development?
c. Have you explored and derived any important messages
from the planning history of the site?
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,
36
d. Do you have a clear statement of the key elements of the

client’s development requirements?
e. Based on the above, have you been able to run something
like the ‘Will it fly?’ test on the project?
2. Are you clear about what your application will be assessed
against?
3. Have you evaluated the LPA’s pre-application processes?
4. Have you prepared to make best use of pre-application
processes?
5. Would your project benefit from design review?
view If so:
a. Have you assessed the quality of any options available
b.
EN
for design review and established
respected basis of review?
shed the most
Are you going for review early

arly enough
m appropriate/
enoug in the process for this

efinement?
to help in design refinement?
IM
6. Would your project benefit from a p
planning performance
agreement?
EC
7. If you feel that

at your application
applica would benefit from consideration
by committee,
tee, have you taken all possible steps to seek to
ensure that this can beb achieved?
8. Have
e you viewed
vie consultation responses and taken any
SP
appropriate action to address concerns by amendment of the

application, or further representations to the LPA or in your
application
presentation
senta to committee?
9. Are you aware of the guidelines for speaking at committee
meetings and have you shaped a presentation which can clearly
convey what you need to within the applicable time limit?
10. Have you identified potential supporters and opponents, and
drawn on support and addressed concerns of opponents?
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
11. Have you prepared and submitted an appropriate supportive/

explanatory statement in response to issues where conflict is
apparent?
37
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

4 Strategic definition at project
inception
p
EN
IM
Stage 0 in the RIBA Plan off Work highlights
highligh the need for fundamental
thinking at the earliest stages project development – starting with the
ges in projec
EC
basic discussions, which

hich might address
add the following points:
• If ‘X’ is the need, is a building

bui the answer?
• If it is to be a building
building, can it be an adaptation/extension or does it
SP
need d to be a new
n building?
• We have the site
si – what is the best built use?
• We have
ve a use requirement – what is the best site/best of the
available sites?
In addressing many of these inception questions, a good understanding

of related planning aspects that are likely to apply is of great help.
While a few projects will be relatively footloose and require some

understanding of the broad planning response likely across a number
of different LPAs, most will be specific to either a particular area or,
even more often, a specific site. In these cases, the focus can be on the
planning approach likely to be taken by a specific LPA.
It is here that the use of the principles behind the ‘Will it fly?’ early
assessment triangle (Figure 3.1 in Chapter 3) are particularly relevant.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

If the preliminary thinking about a project relates to a broad location but is

not site specific, early conversations with the local authority, if they can be
secured, can be very helpful. Realistically, this is most likely when the local
authority has an interest in securing the economic or social benefits which the
proposal might bring, or if it has an interest through the generation of a return
on some of its landholdings.
If applicable, it is important to develop an understanding of the key elements

on the key development requirements side of the early assessment triangle
and the related key planning policy requirements side. The interaction of these
elements will form the basis for an intelligent site search, allowing sites which
are a poor fit to be quickly dismissed and highlighting those with the greatest
potential to produce successful outcomes.
Most commonly, the local authority will be unwilling or unable able to assist
as in the
search for a site and will only engage when the inception on process has focused
on a particular site. At this point, all three sides of the
triangle come into play.
For the architect, this involves:

EN assessment
he early assessm
asse
IM
• developing and communicating a deep understanding
understa of the character of
the site and surrounding area
EC
• an assessment of the likelyy capacity of th

the site
• working with the client to
o establish the key elements of a brief for the
development.
SP
It follows that you will

ll have to sshare the first of these tasks with the LPA in
utually
tually agreed assessment of the site’s character, determine
order to reach a mutually
the LPA’s response to the inter
interplay between the site and the key elements
int
nd
of the client’s brief, andd highlight
hig the most important aspects of planning
policy which will fundamentally test the ability of the site to accommodate the
development. This last element allows the architect and client to explore forms
of development which will sit within a triangulation of these three elements.
In extreme situations, this process can expose fundamental conflicts between

certain elements of the brief and the physical or policy capacity of the selected
site at an early stage in the life of a project. This can lead to conversations
which result in either a fundamental review of the brief in response to site or
policy constraints or the consideration of alternative sites where the identified
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
constraints do not apply or can more readily be overcome.
With LPAs subject to resource constraints, it may be difficult, or even

impossible, to conduct this process as a conversation/exchange with the LPA.
If this is the case, there is still significant merit in going through your side of
the process and recording your material as components in a developing Design
40
Strategic definition at
project inception 4
Statement to support the application. The value of and approach to Design

Statements are covered in detail in Chapter 6 but, at this stage, it is worth
adopting the following principles.
Principle 4.1: Develop and communicate a thorough understanding

of the site and its immediate and wider context
Apart from its value within the planning context, a deep understanding of the
unique qualities of your site can have great value in many other aspects of
project and design development. As a simple example, taking advantage of
orientation and the presence of any water on or around the site can make huge
contributions to the sustainability performance of a development at no, or
negligible, cost.
Principle 4.2: Develop and demonstrate a reasonab

reasonable
understanding of the planning framework
proposals will be assessed
ork against which
The contrast between reasonable consistency

sistency
w
ency in Buil
your
EN
Building Regulations across
n planning pol
the country and the wide variation in policy requirements from place
IM
to place has been covered.
icable
able local pol
Establishing currently applicable po
policy frameworks can be quite
EC
ns are old, the

challenging. If local plans they will have diminishing weight relative
to national planning policy. If you are in a location where plans are being
ucture of local government
reviewed or the structure g has been subject to change,
ements of old plans
you will have elements p (‘saved policies’) still in play as part of the
current policyy framewo
framework.
SP
k regularly wi
If you work with one or a small number of LPAs, it is worth investing
loping
ping a clear understanding of the planning policy frameworks
time in developing
ch of their areas, including the added layer of adopted and
that apply in each
emerging neighbourhood plans where these apply, and any relevant guidelines.
On the same basis, it is worth investing time to understand the politics of

planning within the relevant LPA:
• What are the big issues?

• How are they being dealt with?
• Are there party political divides on certain issues?
• Are there any recent developments which are comparable to what you
are currently working on or might work on in the near future? If so, what
happened during their planning processes?
• Who was supportive?
• What was the nature of objection, if any, and who were the objectors?
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
41
If you are new to working in an area, or simply find it all too confusing, it may
be worth developing a relationship with a planning consultancy which is
familiar with the LPA, its policy base and the politics of planning in the locality
in question.
Work in this area will help you to anticipate planning issues and, with your
client, develop design and development strategies that allow you to anticipate
and avoid areas of difficulty or mitigate their impact.
Anticipating potential issues
If you have reached a position where there appears to be a reasonable prospect

that the proposal might be successful in terms of potential plannann
planning consent,
it is helpful to think through the range of things that might
htt be encountered
encou at
the project. This could include the range and optimum

establish certainty in planning through consentss and, in particular,
could constrain the construction process or the
particu
partic
peration of the
he operation
EN
a later stage in the planning process that could have a significant im
impact on
um timing of actions
ac to
factors that
t completed
development.
IM
Conditions that affect construction often en come into play
p late in the project
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
process and in discussions on planning. nning.

ng. However,
However if the site is highly
EC
ation, it is worth
constrained or in a sensitive location, wor anticipating potential
issues in this area at the preparation
paration
aration and bri briefing stage. They may feature as
issues in the site assessment ent process and,
an
and in themselves, prompt a review
of the suitability of the site. least, the practicability and likely costs of
ite. At the leas
SP
lications will
addressing their implications w fe feature at an early stage in the development
of proposals and thehe the project’s probable financial performance.
e testing of tth
For sites with potentially

ally
lly acu
acute construction constraints, where a planning
m
requirement for the submission of a construction method statement can be
anticipated, consider adopting a construction procurement method which
appoints a building contractor early in the design process. This will allow the
design and a construction method statement to be developed in parallel,
increasing cost certainty and minimising the potential for planning difficulties
at a later stage.
On a similar basis, where issues concerning the operation of the proposed

development and its immediate or wider context are anticipated, it can be
helpful to explore these at the preparation and briefing stage. This process will,
again, allow consideration of the practicability and cost of any mitigation that
is likely to be required to be built into the early stage work on the project – and
could, in extreme situations, lead to fundamental changes to the proposals or
influence the selection of the site.
42
Strategic definition at
project inception 4
KEY QUESTIONS
1. Considering your client’s requirements, what is the best

response – new building, refurbishing or altering buildings etc?
2. How flexible is the location of the site?
3. Is there a good relationship between the needs of the project,
the client’s requirements and the selected site?
4. Have you developed and communicated a thorough
understanding of the site?
5. Have you established and demonstrated a clear understanding
of the key elements of planning status and d planning
pla policy
se?
relating to the site and its proposed use?
policy?
EN
6. Have you tested key elements of your client’s brief against the
nd key elemen
site’s character and capacity and elements of planning
IM
7. Have you considered issues might become significant
sues which mi
later in the planning process, such as construction or
raints
operational constraints?
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
43
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5 Applications and consents
se
EN
IM
This chapter focuses on clarifying
arifying the con
consents that you will need,
getting your application(s)) registered a
and progressing through the
EC
consideration and determination

etermination stages
st and, during this process,
iate balance between
striking an appropriate b the certainty needed regarding
the acceptability proposals and the level of investment in and
ty of the propos
de
commitment to detailed design development.
SP
e content of this chapter largely relates to work within RIBA Plan

While the
of Work 2020 Stages
Stag 2 and 3, depending on the nature and context of the
nt, it may
development, m well be commenced in Stage 1 and extend to include
issues more normally addressed in Stages 4, 5 and 6.
Managing architectural services and related fees

in association with the planning components of
a project
Understanding the potential demands of the planning process associated

--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
with a project in the early stages of its development is an important

element in scoping related professional services. This is particularly
applicable if the services are defined to include a specific component
related to the preparation and submission of a planning application.
Without clarity in this area, it can be easy to underestimate the amount of

work involved and it may be a struggle to justify to your client the extent of the
work which will be required.
Ideally, this understanding needs to cover the likely validation requirements

and the approach to material to be submitted with the application together
with further detail which is expected to follow later in compliance with any
conditions imposed. It is useful to understand validation requirements and the
implication of the extent to which they limit the potential to defer aspects of
detail for later submission in response to conditions attached to any consent.
Principle 5.1: Be clear on the planning and related consents

required
To make effective progress, it is vital that you are clear about the type of
consent, application and requirements necessary to make e an effective
effec
application of this character.
Having worked through the project preparation and
of the project regarding the need for planning

EN
d briefing stage,
stage you will
stag
ectt of the planni
hopefully have achieved relative clarity in respect plann
planning dimensions
g consent and any other consents
IM
quire.
which your project, or aspects of it, will require.
The Government provides guidance on n ‘Making an application’

a as part of
the online NPPG.1 This guidance iss updated from time to time and will bring
EC
you up to date with the current advice. At its cco

core, it clearly indicates the
two main types of planning application
plication (ful
(fu
(full and outline) and details a range of
n, the most sign
other types of application, significant being those for:
SP
• approval of reserved
erved matters
mat
• discharge of conditions
onditions
• amending proposals
sals w
which have planning permission
• amending planning obligations
• Lawful Development Certificates
• prior approval of some permitted development rights
• non-planning consents, such those under the advertisement regulations
or those related to Tree Preservation Orders and hazardous substances.
You may find yourself in a position where you feel your proposals lie
somewhere between full and outline in their degree of development. This
typically applies to proposals covering substantial areas where you are seeking
consent for an overall masterplan which sets out the over-arching framework
for phased development and provides a coherent basis for a first phase of
development, for which you are seeking full planning permission
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
46
5
Such ‘hybrid’ applications are not uncommon in the world of major housing
development sites. The Planning Portal neatly outlines the position on
hybrid applications:
Whether to accept a proposal in hybrid form is at the discretion of the

local planning authority, not something on which an applicant may
insist. Please note, in the interest of good planning a local planning
authority is empowered to require details even when the application is
in outline. The term ‘hybrid application’ is not defined in statute. It is
recommended that you discuss your hybrid proposal with the relevant
local planning authority prior to submitting an application. This will
efu
minimise the risk of the local planning authority refusing to register the
hybrid application.2
EN
Since the Government does not provide specific guida
handling of hybrid applications, individual
vidual
guidan
guidance on the making and
have developed their own
al LPAs hav
ground rules for their acceptabilityy in principle, the
tth circumstances in which
IM
they are acceptable and the information
mation which they require to be submitted
ormation
with them. In preparation forr discussion wit
with the LPA it should be possible
to deduce their position onn hybrid applications
applic from an examination of their
EC
arable proposa
handling of past comparable proposal
proposals and their requirements for outline and
full applications.
Principle 5.2:: Be clear on tthe validation requirements for the

SP
planning consents requ

required
Numerous application
applicatio
applications, once submitted, are extensively delayed by issues of
his is the process that LPAs go through to ensure that they have
‘validation’. This
received all the information needed to register an application and, importantly,
to commence consultation on it. Fundamentally, this process involves running
through a checklist to establish the presence or absence of required material,
but generally does not address the quality of that material. Most LPAs treat
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
this as a purely administrative process before applications are passed to the

planning case officers.
To minimise the potential for delay at this point, and the possibility that the
application might be returned to you as ‘invalid’, it is helpful to carefully run
through the LPA’s validation requirements for the area of your proposal. Unless
you are already familiar with them, you need to do this for each relevant LPA,
since they vary from area to area.
It is also advisable to be clear on the validation requirements likely to be

applied by the particular LPA to the type of development you are working on as
47
you prepare your quote for services, if this is to include a component relating
to the preparation and submission of a planning application. Without clarity in
this area you may well underestimate the amount of work involved or struggle
to justify to your client the extent of work which will be required.
This is particularly pertinent in the case of outline applications, as many

LPAs have validation requirements that require almost as much material as
applications for full planning permission.
As part of the process, check which surveys are required to be submitted with
the application. The requirement for these surveys may vary between outline
and fully detailed applications. Particularly important are any environmental
or ecological surveys required, such as those relating to the presence of
me
bats. Environmental surveys are generally subject to strict timee llimits due to
seasonal behavioural patterns and are often only valid for a limited period.
ming for subm
The timings of such surveys may well affect the ideal timing submission of
the application.
The validation requirements for each LPA are published

ublished generally available
lished and ge
on the LPA’s website. They are formed of two o separate comp
components: a short list
of nationally prescribed validation requirements
ements
ments and a lo longer list of locally
ature of these locally
prescribed requirements. The broad nature lo prescribed
requirements is guided by Government nt policy thro
ent through
throu the NPPF:
EC
Local planning authorities

ties should pub
publish a list of their information
plications for planning
requirements for applications p permission. These
SP
requirements should
ould be kept
kep to the minimum needed to make decisions,
eviewed at least
and should be reviewed le every two years. Local planning
authorities should request supporting information that is relevant,
uld only re
terial to the application in question.3
necessary and material
The national validation requirements, set out on the Planning Portal,

are as follows:
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
As a minimum, you must provide the following documents for your

planning application to be valid:
• he standard application form.
• Most planning applications require two plans to be submitted as
supporting documents:
48
5
▪ location plan – which shows the site area and its

surrounding context
▪ site plan (sometimes known as a block plan) – which shows
the proposed development in detail.
• An ownership certificate (one of four options) stating the
ownership of the property.
• Agricultural holdings certificate – this is required whether
or not the site includes an agricultural holding.
(Any agricultural tenants must be notified prior to the submission
of the application.)
• Design and access statement (if required*) – th
this should outline
the design principles and concepts that
hat have been applied to the
development’.)4
ENssues relati
proposed development and how issues relating to access to the
development have been dealt with. (*For appl
applications for ‘major
IM
Design and Access Statements ts are currently required to accompany
applications for listed building
lding
ng consent oor one or more dwellings or buildings
EC
0m2 orr more, o

with a floor space of 100m
00m or within a conservation area or
World Heritage Site, orr for ‘major d
development’ as defined in the Town and
de
Country Planning Regulations:
SP
“major development”
developm means development which involves one or more
of the following—
wing
(a) the winning and working of minerals or the use of land for
mineral-working deposits;
(b) waste development;
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
(c) the provision of dwellinghouses where—

(i) the number of dwellinghouses to be provided is 10 or more;
or
(ii) the development is to be carried out on a site having an
area of 0.5 hectares or more and it is not known whether the
development falls within sub-paragraph (c)(i);
49
(d) the provision of a building or buildings where the floor space to

be created by the development is 1,000 square metres or more;
or
(e) development carried out on a site having an area of 1 hectare
or more.5
In addition, we need to draw attention to the potential need for applications

for development which is ‘likely to have significant effects upon the
environment’6 to be accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
(EIA).
finition
nition of these
The NPPG’s coverage of this issue sets out the broad definition th
developments and the steps in the EIA process. This starts
opinion’, which establishes whether or not the nature
impact is such that an EIA will be required, through
establishes the range of issues that the EIA will
ure EN
tarts with a ‘sc
re and extent o
gh ‘scoping’, which
ugh
ill need to addr
w
‘screening
of likely
address, to the
detailed dimensions of production and consideration
IM
nsideration of tthe EIA.
Apart from noting that the determination

ion period for applications
a involving
ecialist
ialist support
an EIA is extended to 16 weeks, specialist suppor is likely to be valuable in
EC
addressing the production of ann EIA, should the

th screening opinion reach the
ed.
d.
conclusion that one is required.
Local planning authority’s a

additional local information
SP
validation requirements
quirements
uirement
The listing of the LPA’s req

requirements is much more extensive and, in most
cases, they are specific to an individual LPA. In some instances, they apply
across a number of LPAs which have jointly adopted them for use within
their particular areas (e.g. the validation checklist adopted by the five former
Tyne and Wear County LPAs). The lists need to cover a wide range of possible
requirements relating to potential characters and scales of development.
Clearly, not all will apply to every application. The listings identify the uses
and circumstances to which they will apply. Many only become applicable
when the development proposal crosses a threshold in this particular area
of requirement.
With no Government guidance on the format of the listing, individual LPAs, or

groups of LPAs, set out their requirements in different ways. In this context,
other than in respect of the nationally prescribed requirements, you will
need to check, for each potential application, both the list of requirements
50
5
and the thresholds and circumstances in which particular requirements

become applicable for the particular LPA to which you will be submitting
an application.
Example of requirements
The following provides an indication of how requirements are set out by
looking at how one LPA, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham
(LBHF), handles them through its website.
LBHF has a particularly helpful way of setting out their requirements with a
‘Making a planning application’7 page on their website, which has links to
specific validation checklists for different types of application. The links set
out things which must be included with all applications ons
ns of this type, followed
by a series of questions relating to the location of the site, the application
content and various aspects of impact. Depending ding
ing on the res
response to each
of the questions, additional information is required
application. This helps applicants to be clear
they would need to submit material such
equired for the
lear on the circumstances
circ
ch as a travel p
EN
t validation of the
in which
plan, tree survey or land
contamination assessment.
IM
EC
Each planning application

cation requires
require a set of supporting documents.
ational and local
These are set at national loca level, and vary for each application.
View the validation
ation checklist for your planning application:
• Minor,, householder
hous and full application
SP
• Lawful Devel
Development Certificates
• n-mat
Non-material amendments
• Advertisement consent
• Local validation checklist for major applications
• Financial viability declaration form to be included with a financial
viability report
• Listed buildings consent (including conservation area consent
for demolition in a conservation area)
• Prior notification for permitted development by
telecommunications code operators
• Prior notification for proposed demolition
• Removal or variation of a condition
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
51
• Approval of details reserved by condition

• Tree works for trees subject to Tree Preservation Order (TPO)
Remember: Your application will not be valid until you send us
all the required documents. Once we receive a valid application,
we’ll consider it.8
By way of illustration, their local validation checklist for the validation of major
applications is as follows:
Part 1: Validation requirements

Documents that must be included with your application
• Correct Fee
ication
EN
• ned (unless submitted
Application Form, completed, signed sub
IM
electronically) and dated
• Ownership Certificate:
EC
▪ A (included in Application
plication Form
Form: the applicant owns the land)
OR
▪ B (Form Part
rt 2(1): the applicant
app owns only part of the land or
does not own the land but has served certificate of notice on
SP
er) OR
owner)
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
▪ C (Form
rm Part 2 2(2): the applicant does not own the land,
le to iissue certificate but has notified owners) OR
is unable
▪ D (Form Part 2(2): the applicant does not own the land,
is unable to issue certificate and is trying to ascertain the
names and details of the owner)
• Agricultural Holdings Certificate
• Site Location Plan (scale 1:1250 or 1:2500) with the application
site outlined in red and any other land owned by the applicant
outlined in blue
• Site Layout Plan/Block Plan (scale 1:100 or 1:200)
• Existing and proposed Elevations (scale 1:50 or 1:100)
• Existing and proposed Floor Plans (scale 1:50 or 1:100)
52
5
• Existing and proposed Roof Plans (scale 1:50 or 1:100)

• Existing and proposed site sections and finished floor and
site levels (scale 1:50 or 1:100)
• Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) form and CIL assumption of
liability form (to ensure CIL is calculated correctly)
Part 2: Local requirements
Note: the additional documents required will depend on the nature of
the proposal.
Applicants should seek pre-application advice on any significant
proposal, where officers will advise on the appropriate
pria documents to be
submitted in a planning application.
EN
Question 1: Will your proposal create 1 orr more dwe
dwellings or 100sqm
of floorspace or does the developmentt affect a listed building or
conservation area?
• ac
If yes, please provide a design and access statement.
IM
Question 2: Is your proposal Environmental Agency Flood
al within the En
zone 2 or 3 and relate to a basement and/or
a ground floor level?
EC
• If yes, please
e provide the flood
flo risk assessment (including all
sources of surface water and sewer flooding).
Question 3: Does your proposal
prop involve the construction of a new
basementt or the low
lowering, enlargement or external alteration of an
SP
existing
g basement?
• Iff yes,
es, a construction
co statement for basements will be required
with h your
you application.
Question 4: Does the proposal impact on the light to a neighbouring
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
property?
• If yes, a daylight/sunlight assessment should be provided.
[The full document continues to a total of 16 questions.]
Part 3: Major developments
Applicants are advised to seek pre-application advice for all major
developments. If your proposal is for a development of 10 or more
new dwellings, erection of non-residential buildings or extensions of
1000sqm or more you will also need to include the following:
• Sustainability statement incorporating energy assessment
53
• Sustainable Drainage Strategy (can be included as part of the

Flood Risk Assessment)
• Transport statement (including refuse and recycling
requirements and servicing/delivery management)
• Statement of community involvement
• Draft construction plan
• Draft logistics plan
Question 1: Will the development support the proposed provision of
affordable housing?
• If yes, a financial viability report plus the Financial Viabi
Viability
declaration form should be provided
made publicly available along with all the other

EN
*An applicant’s financial viability appraisal or toolkit
oolkit assessment
assessm will be
er planning application
supporting documents. In exceptional circumstances
a
the request
stances at th
of the applicant specific elements of thee appraisal ma
may be treated as
IM
confidential and not be made public, but where the applicant has
ut only wher
demonstrated that disclosure would uld cause harm to public interest to
such an extent that the harm outweighs
utweighs the benefits
be of disclosure.
EC
Question 2: Will a planning

g obligation be required?
• If yes, a planning
ng obligation’s draft head of terms should be
provided.
SP
Question 3: Will the development

develop impact on open space or natural
habitats/protected
ted species?
species
• If yes, a biodiversity
diver survey and report should be provided.
Question 4: Is the development residential or will it require public
access?
• If yes, an accessibility statement should be provided.9
The examples above do not include the requirement for a Heritage Statement,
which is an additional requirement to accompany applications which have
dimensions which impact on heritage assets such as Listed Buildings and
Conservation Areas.
You may struggle to understand the rationale behind the requirement for some
of the information listed as necessary for your application. As explained earlier
in this chapter, the NPPF requires the preparation of the list and suggests that
54 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5
the list should keep requirements to a minimum and be reviewed every two
years. This biennial review is the subject of public consultation. Experience
suggests that there is little other than delay to be gained from querying
requirements in an established checklist. To manage the situation, you are
advised to record what you consider to be inappropriate or excessive, share
these views with other applicants and bring them into play when trying to
secure improvement through the public consultation process.
This issue is covered in more detail in Chapter 10, along with other areas where
you might engage with the planning system locally and the ‘user groups’ which
many LPAs convene to secure a more sensitive and constructive planning
framework and more responsive operation.
Principle 5.3: Establish an appropriate balance

nce
ce b
between certainty
and investment in detail
Outline applications allow you to gain some
EN
e certainty on proposals
velopment. In the
relatively early stage in their detailed development.
line on a plan defining the site, with a simple
mple commitment
commit
pr at a
th distant past, a red
to the use class,
would suffice as an application to establish
stablish the ac
acceptability of a site for a
IM
particular use – most usually for housing sites
sites. LPAs now require much more
ecisions on th
material to help them reach decisions the acceptability or otherwise of
outline applications.
EC
The following list gives

s an idea of the range of additional material you might be
asked to provide inn support of an o
outline application.
SP
Applications
tions for out
outline planning permission might also include:
• escrip
A description of proposed works.
• The number of dwellings and footprint of non-residential
development.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
• The existing use.

• Pedestrian and vehicular access, roads and right of way.
• Waste storage and collection.
• Materials and character.
• Vehicle parking.
• Foul drainage.
• An assessment of flood risk.
55
• Biodiversity and geological conservation.

• Boundary treatments.
• Trees and hedges.
• Trade effluent.
• Likely contribution to local employment.
• Hours of operation.
• Site area.
• Industrial or commercial processes and machinery.
• Hazardous substances.
• Agricultural holdings.
•
•
Main infrastructure.
Public open spaces.
EN
• Water features.
IM
• Topography.
• ng policy (see N
Compliance with planning National Planning Policy
EC
Framework).
• Ownership certificates.
ficates.
SP
Establishing certainty
It is valuable to discuss th
the elements of risk with your clients. Clearly, it is
only full planning permission, covering all details of a development, that
can establish with absolute certainty all planning aspects of a development
proposal. However, this requires considerable investment in the development
of all the detailed aspects of a proposal with a degree of risk that the proposal
may be wholly or substantially unacceptable in planning terms – a degree of
risk which clients may be unwilling to accept.
Potential to postpone details
As indicated earlier in this chapter, there are two routes by which investment
of time and cost in aspects of detailed design can be postponed until after
planning support for the principles behind the development has been secured
– applications for outline planning consent or hybrid applications.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
56
5
There will be contexts in which LPAs are unwilling to entertain outline

applications or the outline components of hybrid applications – most notably
in conservation areas and other sensitive environments. However, outside
these areas, these options can prove to be helpful devices for securing
certainty on fundamental elements of proposals, as a basis for investing in the
development of fuller detail – in effect, ‘reserving matters’ for later submission.
When considering approaches that can use conditions to defer elements of

detailed work, it is important to recognise the potential for delay later in the
project programme as you wait for conditions to be discharged following their
submission to the LPA. Notionally, the determination periods for conditions are
the same as for the application itself (eight weeks for most applications and
13 weeks for major applications) but there can be a tendency within LPAs to
icatio
atio
focus their limited resources on incoming new applications, with the discharge
of conditions being delayed. To address perceivededd abuses iin this area, the
Government has introduced ‘deemed discharge’
EN
ge’ provisions. The availability
and processes related to these are covered in Chapter 7.
Reserved matters
IM
If granted, an outline planning
ng consent, or tthe outline element of a hybrid
consent, will be subject too conditions requiring
req the subsequent approval of one
EC
or more ‘reserved matters’.

ers’. Core elem
eleme
elements of reserved matters are indicated on
ation
ion form and expanded
the planning application e upon in the online NPPG.
SP
Reservedd matters aare those aspects of a proposed development which

licant can ch
an applicant choose not to submit details of with an outline
planningg applica
application (i.e. they can be ‘reserved’ for later determination).
These are defin
defined in article 2 of the Town and Country Planning
(Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 as:
• ‘Access’ – the accessibility to and within the site, for vehicles,
cycles and pedestrians in terms of the positioning and treatment
of access and circulation routes and how these fit into the
surrounding access network.
• ‘Appearance’ – the aspects of a building or place within the
development which determine the visual impression the
building or place makes, including the external built form of the
development, its architecture, materials, decoration, lighting,
colour and texture.
• ‘Landscaping’ – the treatment of land (other than buildings) for
the purpose of enhancing or protecting the amenities of the site
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
57
and the area in which it is situated and includes: (a) screening by

fences, walls or other means; (b) the planting of trees, hedges,
shrubs or grass; (c) the formation of banks, terraces or other
earthworks; (d) the laying out or provision of gardens, courts,
squares, water features, sculpture or public art; and (e) the
provision of other amenity features.
• ‘Layout’ – the way in which buildings, routes and open spaces
within the development are provided, situated and orientated in
relation to each other and to buildings and spaces outside the
development.
• din proposed
‘Scale’ – the height, width and length of each building
gs.10
within the development in relation to its surroundings.
EN
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
As an applicant you can choose how much or how w little you ‘res
‘reserve’ in
making your outline application or the outline e component
mponent of your hybrid
eserving all matters
application. Your options can range from reserving mat
ma to reserving
some of these matters or reserving certainain aspects of various
vva matters.
Essentially, the more important it is to
o you and your cclients to have certainty
oposals, the more
regarding particular aspects of proposals, mo important it will be for
g these areas in your application rather than
you to include material covering
nsideration.
ideration.
reserving them for future consideration.
Once outline planning permission

ermission has been granted, ‘reserved matters’
applications must be
e made wit
within three
th years.
S
Pre-commencement
cement
emen conditions
Pre-commencement conditions refer to those which are attached to a

planning consent with a clear statement requiring them be discharged
(i.e. both submitted and approved) before construction commences on site.
In responding to a perception of abuses in the use of pre-commencement

conditions by LPAs in order to delay development, the Government has acted
to constrain their use. Guidance on the processes involved in agreement
to the attaching of pre-application conditions is set out in the NPPG under
‘Use of planning conditions’.11 However, this guidance is drafted on the basis
of processes designed to prevent unwarranted forcing of these conditions on
unwilling applicants.
If you wish to delay the development of detailed proposals in areas which have
typically been the subject of pre-commencement conditions in the past, it is
58
5
worth exploring these issues with the LPA, expressing your willingness to have
these areas covered by pre-commencement conditions. It is helpful to do this
as part of the pre-application discussions to prevent the absence of material
covering these areas delaying validation.
Time periods for determination, planning guarantees

and ‘free go’s
The NPPG clearly sets out the time periods within which the Government
expects various types of planning applications to be determined. It also covers
provision under the ‘planning guarantee’ for the refunding of application
ally overrun without
fees in the event that these timescales are substantially
written agreement from applicants. Inevitably, there
ere are
re a number of detailed
ite
te is the best way to check
provisos in this area and reference to the website
which terms apply.
EN
What are the time periods for determining
etermining a planning
p application?
IM
Once a planning applicationon has been validated,
val the local planning
authority should make a decision on theth proposal as quickly as
possible, and in any event within tthe statutory time limit unless a longer
EC
n writing with the

period is agreed in th applicant.
u
The statutory time limits are usually 13 weeks for applications for
major development
opment and 8 weeks for all other types of development
SP
(unless an applica
application is subject to an Environmental Impact
Assessment, which case a 16 week limit applies).
ment, in whic
lannin application takes longer than the statutory period to
Where a planning
decide, and an extended period has not been agreed with the applicant,
the government’s policy is that the decision should be made within
26 weeks at most in order to comply with the ‘planning guarantee’.12
There is a right of appeal on the basis of ‘non-determination’ if the LPA fail

to determine an application within the prescribed timescale without the
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
applicants agreement to an extension of the timescale (covered in more detail

in chapter 9).
The ‘free go’ provisions allow the submission of a planning application
without the payment of a planning fee. Essentially, these apply to the making
of a further application for broadly similar development proposals following
withdrawal of the original application or the refusal of an application. The area
is more complex than this, being subject to a requirement that submission
59
be made within 12 months of the withdrawal or refusal and a number of other

factors. The NPPG provides links to details and to a table of circumstances in
which applications are eligible for a ‘free go’.12
Varying consents once you have them
So, you have planning consent for your proposals, but your client’s
requirements have changed and they want to seek consent for amended
proposals. This opens another area of complexity in planning in which there
are different routes depending on the degree of change being sought, the
context of the original proposal and the nature of the proposed change.
There are three classes of amendment: ‘minor amendments’,, ‘minor ‘m material

amendments’ and ‘material amendments’. However, there absence
e is an ab
sta
of accessible coverage on the distinction in the NPPG. The lack of statutory
definition is explained by the Government by reference
importance of the context of the original consent and the specifi
being sought. What might constitute a minor amendment
enormous
nce to the en
enorm
specific amendment
endment in one
o context could
EN
be a material amendment in another. With this his in mind, a discussion
d with the
IM
LPA is very important to minimise uncertainty: nty: first, regarding
ainty: rega
reg which category of
amendment the proposed changes are e seen to fall wwi
within and therefore under
which section of the Town and Country ry Planning Act
ntry A 1990 the application is
EC
being made; and second, to gain n an indication of the prospects of success.

The latter point is particularlyy important. If an
a application for a non-material or
minor material amendmentt is refused, a whollyw new planning permission will
be needed or the project ctt must revert to the original consent and any conditions
SP
attached to this.
Consent lifetimes
mes
If you have consent, you may well ask how long does it last?
By law, any planning permission granted expires after a certain period.

Generally, unless your permission says otherwise, you have three years
from the date it’s granted to begin the development. If you haven’t
started work by then, you will probably need to reapply.
[…]
If outline permission has been granted, you will need to submit a further
application for approval of anything that was not covered by the outline
application (known as “reserved matters”) before starting work. This
must be done within three years of the grant of outline permission.11
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
60
5
Things are more complex when dealing with outline planning consents. With
an outline planning consent, you have a further two years from the approval
of the last reserved matter to commence development before the planning
consent expires.
Commencement of development to maintain a planning consent’s

validity
Both expiry features refer to the need to variously ‘begin the development’ or
have ‘started work’ to avoid the planning consent expiring. Much has been
written on what constitutes the ‘commencement of development’.
Since ‘development’ in planning can cover either constructional operations

ent of development are
or changes of use, broad definitions of commencement
needed to cover both scenarios. In essence, development
elopment
lopment is accepted as
having begun:
• in the case of operations, at the earliest

operation is carried out
rliest date on w EN
which a material
• se,
e, when the new
in the case of a change of use, ne use is instituted
n
IM
• where development comprises
mprises carrying
carryin out operations and a change of
e operations being
use, the earlier of the be
b carried out or the change of use
being instituted.
EC
A material operation iss defined by S

Section 56 of the Town and Country Planning
Act 1990 to mean::
a. any work
ork of construct
con
construction in the course of the erection of a building
SP
b. anyy work of dem

demolition of a building
c. the digging
gging
ging of a trench which is to contain the foundations, or part of
the foundations, of a building
d. the laying of any underground main or pipe to the foundations, or part
of the foundations, of a building or to any such trench as is mentioned
in paragraph (c)
e. any operation in the course of laying out or constructing a road or part of
a road
f. any change in the use of any land which constitutes material
development.
What happens if my consent expires?

Reduced to its simplest terms, in the event that a consent expires, you will
have to apply for renewal of the expired consent. Renewals are treated as new
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
61
applications. There is a presumption in favour of approval of the application,

unless there have been changes in policy since the previous approval was
granted. You may, however, find that applications are subject to provisions
that have been introduced since the consideration of the original applications.
A common area involved here is Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), which
may not have been adopted in the area of your application when you received
your original consent but which could now be in place.
To reduce the uncertainty surrounding what is, effectively, a new application

for consent and the possibility that additional charges or constraints
could be imposed, developers will frequently seek to take steps to effect a
commencement of development before the expiry of the original consent.
Due to the potential significance of the expiry of a consent, itt is advisable to

seek an assurance from the LPA that the works being undertaken
ertaken to establish
a commencement of development would be viewed as adequate to ensure e that
the consent remained valid.
EN
KEY QUESTIONS
IM
1. Have you considered the nature
ture and timing
timin of likely planning
activity across the duration project? From this, have you:
n of your proj
EC
a. Scoped the likely timing of your related work?

ly extent and ti
b. Defined and sought appropriate
appro coverage of this in your
scope of services and re
related fee basis?
SP
2. Are you clear what planning and planning related consents

lear on wh
will be needed?
eeded?
3. If your client’s requirements lie somewhere between outline
t’s req
and full planning consent have you explored the potential for a
“hybrid” application with the LPA?
4. Are you clear on your specific LPA’s validation requirements
for your application – both national and local requirements
– and any requirements you might trigger by crossing related
thresholds in the scale or nature of development?
5. Are you clear whether your application will require an EIA?
If unsure, have you sought a Screening Opinion? If an EIA is
needed, have you sought a scoping report to define the areas of
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
potential impact which will need to be covered?
62
5
6. Have you established with your client the balance between the
work needed to secure the certainty provided from full planning
consent with the risk of deferring some detailed work to later in
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
the planning process?
7. Have you investigated your client’s willingness to accept
pre-commencement conditions, if likely to be requested by
the LPA?
8. Have you noted the date of validation of your application and
diarised the expiry of the statutory time limit for the class of
application?
9. If your client has concerns about extending
g beyond
be the statutory
time limit, have you investigated the potential merit of an appeal
otential m
EN
on the grounds of “non-determination”?
ion”?
10. If you have withdrawn an application
cation or had one
e 12-month period
recently, have you diarised the p
o refused
for submitting a
ement applica
potential “free go” replacement application?
IM
11. In the event your client wants to vary
va a planning consent, have
you clarified whether
her the amendment
amend is viewed by the LPA as
a minor amendment,
ment, minor material
m amendment or a material
EC
amendment requiring a fulfull replacement application?

12. Have you u noted the exexpiry date of your planning consent and
blished what yo
established your client wishes to do to keep their consent
alive,
ve, if there is a likelihood of it expiring?
SP
63
EN
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
IM
EC
SP

6 Design Statement as a
design process tool
ol
EN
IM
This chapter outlines the ways in which a well-prepared Design
Statement, developed from m the outset of the design process, can be the
EC
most valuable tool in helping archit

architects to interface with planners and
the planning systemm and can con
contribute significantly to the securing of
planning consent.
ent.
It explores
s the use o
of a Design Statement as:
SP
• a design
esign process
proce tool
ns of taking charge of the planning debate/conversation
• a means
• a negotiating tool
• an audit trail.
There was a period when regulations required most planning applications

to be supported by Design and Access Statements. CABE published
some excellent guidance on producing these, titled Design and Access
Statements: How to write, read and use them,1 which is still available
online from the CABE archive.
Sadly, many applications subsequently ticked the submission box by

including cursory coverage of the list of contents required with little
substantive explanation and even less justification of the proposals.
Subsequent amendments to regulations removed the requirement to
submit a D&A from all but a few types of application.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

While they are rarely formally required and have slipped from view in recent
guidance, various earlier iterations of Government guidance on design in
planning consistently recommended the use of Design Statements in support
of applications.
Combined Heritage, Design and Access Statements
Planning applications with heritage dimensions (predominantly those

relating to conservation areas or nationally or locally listed buildings) come
with a requirement for the submission of a Heritage Statement. Since there
is generally a strong relationship between the issues and decisions made
for design and heritage purposes, there is great merit in producing a single
statement which combines both Design and Heritage and, iff required,
requ
equ
Access Statements. Combining the material allows coherent ent expression
express
and understanding of the relationship between what should be interlocking
dimensions of the design approach. To minimise potential
in validation, it is wise to have cleared the adoption
tion
equiring
pre-application discussions on applications requiring
inter
otential difficulties
difficult
difficu
approach in
on of this app
appr
ring Herita
EN
Heritage Statements.
IM
When submitting applications for projects Heritage Asset on the
ts affecting a He
Planning Portal, it is likely you will encounter
counter a section
secti
sectio which specifically
requires the attaching of a heritage e statement
tatement – anand you may find yourself
a
EC
unable to proceed further without ut doing this. In

I this situation, simply submit
the combined statement again n in this location.
locatio
Any completed statement is unlikely to de

demonstrate all aspects of the arguments;
however, an example of a complete ccombined Heritage, Design and Access
SP
ppendix
pendix A as a working
Statement forms Appendix w illustration of many of the points.
The example Heritage,e, Design and Access Statement was prepared to manage
ge,
and then support the conclusion
oncl
onclu of the design process interface with all aspects
of planning for a potentially challenging development. The challenge was
assessing how to gain planning consent for the enlarging of an already large and
ugly extension to a house in a prominent location in the North Pennines AONB.
The clients in this project say that people often assume that it must have been
hard to get consent for the eventual design and they respond by saying that
the process couldn’t have gone more smoothly. The following sections draw on
material in this combined statement to illustrate principles.
Design Statement principles
The principles relate to Design Statements generally, rather than to combined

Heritage, Design and Access Statements (which are the subject of the
preceding paras).
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
66
Design Statement as a
design process tool 6
Principle 6.1: Adopt the Design Statement for a project as a positive

design process tool
The Design Statement should ideally be seen and used as a design process tool
– one which is used from the very beginning of work on a project and developed
throughout the design evolution. It should not be something written at the end
of the design process to justify what came out of it, which is an approach seen
in many Design Statements submitted with planning applications.
An ideal statement development process will, in its earliest stages:
• start at the beginning of the project with the site and context assessment
• evaluate the development brief against this – or use this evaluation to
help develop the brief
• establish the likely key issues.
As a platform, the Design Statement can form

pre-application consultation process with
orm for opening a
rm the basis ffo
h the LPA (conducted
ith
suggested in the ‘Will it fly?’ tool in Chapter 3).
(con
EN
along the lines
IM
Principle 6.2: Use your emerging
erging Design Statement to help you
shape and control the dialogue
ialogue
alogue with tthose involved in planning
EC
The value of this approach

ach lies in help
helping you take charge of the design debate
ation
on of the application
within the consideration app by allowing you to:
• clearly sett out the intent behind and reasoning for the proposals
SP
• make the case fo

for the approach adopted
• makee it easy for
fo pplanning officers and individuals and organisations
consulted
edd on tthe application to understand the approach
• make it easy for the planning case officer to explain the proposals
to senior officers, and additionally to council members and to the
committee if this proves to be required
• make the design development and rationale easy to understand in the
appeal process if the application is refused and goes to appeal.
In a context where limited resources may make it difficult for LPAs to engage
with your proposal and its development, using your developing Design
Statement to help you shape and control the dialogue with those involved
in planning can be even more helpful. Setting out a clear rationalisation for
proposals makes it much simpler for planning officers to understand proposals
themselves and the factors which are shaping them. It becomes easier for
them to either support and help it through the planning process, or to highlight
key areas of difficulty and focus discussion on these.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
67
Working principles on key elements of the content of

Design Statements
The CABE guidance on Design and Access Statements related to a period when
Design and Access Statements were formally required with most applications
– and when there was detailed prescription of their content. With the removal
of the requirement for their submission with the majority of applications, the
specific requirements relating to content were removed. The Planning Portal
provides basic guidance on content:
A DAS [Design and Access Statement] must explain the design principles
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
and concepts that have been applied to the development. It must also
demonstrate how the proposed development’s context hass inflinfluenced
the design. The Statement must explain the applicant’ss approach
development. Applicants must also explain

EN
to access and how relevant Local Plan policies have
account, any consultation undertaken in relation
ve been taken into
in
n to access issues,
in how any specific

iss
and how the outcome of this consultation has informed the proposed
spec issues
IM
sed developme
which might affect access to the proposed development have been
addressed.2
EC
Following this guidance and the explored in the ‘Will it fly?’ early
he principles ex
assessment triangle (Figure ar a few things of potentially great
e 3.1), there are
importance in the preparation effective Design Statement. The principles
ration of an effe
detailed below and their
eir handling in Design Statements have contributed to
SP
securing planning consents in cha

challenging
c contexts.
Principle 6.3: Demonstrate

monstra
onstra your thorough understanding of the site
and its immediate and
nd wider context
The site evaluation side of the early assessment triangle will pick up, reflect
and, as appropriate, expand upon any published definition of character. It has,
for some time, been a requirement that conservation area designations must
be accompanied by a Conservation Area Character Statement; however, many
older conservation areas lack these.
The investment in preparing this part of the statement has dual value:
• it demonstrates an appreciation that each site is unique and has unique

qualities, opportunities and constraints
• it actively informs and substantially enriches the design approach to
the site and provides a clear basis for an explanation and justification
of the design approach adopted.
68
Shared as a draft with the LPA, as part of the pre-application discussions,

the character statement will highlight any important variation in the reading
of and, therefore, potentially the response to, the nature and character of the
site. As drafted or refined through pre-application discussion, it will build
confidence in the site evaluation side of the assessment process.
The Heritage, Design and Access Statement reproduced as Appendix A opens

with an extensive assessment of the building and its immediate and wider
context. Supporting maps are derived from this assessment to show the origins
of the building and provide evidence of its change over time.
Principle 6.4: Demonstrate the extent of your understanding of the

key elements of planning policy context relating to the site and
the proposed development
The second side of the early assessment triangle gle involves highlighting
hi the
key elements of planning policy that appearr to apply to thet site and the
proposals for it at the various levels of policy:
olicy:
ent NPPF and NPPG,

• national, as set out in the current N including
uch
current subsets of these, suchch as the Natio
National Design Guide and
National Design Code if the LPA doesn’t have its own
• local, through LPA local
call plans and guidelines
g and neighbourhood plans,
where these are in
n place.
This exercise shows ws an appreciat

appreciati
appreciation of the frameworks LPA planners
will use to assessss your applicat
application and, if necessary, that a planning
inspector willl be using as th
the basis for considering an appeal. If
prepared through
hrough dialogu
dialo
dialogue with planning officers, your statement
should form m an accu
accura base for assessment of emerging proposals.
accurate
ation
ion is not possible, it will at least demonstrate a serious
If this verification
attempt to gain d detailed knowledge of the policy framework and respond
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
in the proposal according to your best understanding of it. It should

demonstrate an appreciation of any areas of difficulty or challenge,
as a basis for explaining later in the statement how these have been
addressed or mitigated.
The Heritage, Design and Access Statement reproduced as Appendix A

identifies relevant key policies, working down from the NPPF, through
local plan and neighbourhood plan policies to the guidance provided
by the North Pennines AONB Building Design Guide3 and more general
guidance from the former English Heritage on the Conversion of
Traditional Farm Buildings.4
69
Principle 6.5: Set out clearly how your proposals have been
shaped by and respond to your understanding of the site and the
planning policy context
Tell the story of how you have brought together your understanding of the
site, your client’s development requirements and planning policy. Explain
how various factors have informed the design process and are reflected in the
outcomes.
The Heritage, Design and Access Statement reproduced as Appendix A

illustrates responses to policy and guidance in the design process and sets out
an ‘Evaluation leading to the proposed design’. It includes reference to the use
of the project as an exemplar in a presentation to a North East RTPI Conference
‘Heritage Matters – from Policy to Practice’ in July 2017, which
ich was used to
h wa
test wider planner reaction to the lines of argument and the developing design
he develop
response.
Figures 6.1 and 6.2 show the building as viewed from the road fr
to Allenheads, followed by initial thoughts on design
from
f
sign approaches
approac
EN
Allendale
to its
improvement. In Figure 6.2 the shadow of the e original rendered
he rend building is laid
IM
on top of the possible alterations shown in drawing.
n the lower dr
d
Figure 6.3 shows the equivalent views approach to the new entrance
wss from the ap
app
EC
of the building. The evaluation continued through to the consideration of

ontinued throu
throug
materials. In this, it drew particularly
cularly on wider
wide contextual use of dark corrugated
sheeting in agricultural and d farm complex buildings in the immediate and wider
surroundings of the North th AONB (see Figure 6.4).
h Pennines AON
SP
Comparative images existing building and proposed application show

ess of the exis
the proposals in a broader cont
context (see Figures 6.5 and 6.6).
Figure 6.1: View of the house from the road
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
70
E
IM
Figure 6.2: Shadow of the original building laid
d on top of the proposed
prop alterations and design rendering,
including proposed pitched roof and reconfigured
figured
ured windows
C
Figure 6.3: Views from the approach to the new entrance of the building
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
71
E
IM
Figure 6.4: Material in use and precedent for traditional use
se
e of corrugated material
mat
ma for both roofs and walls
in farm buildings, including junctions with slate roofs
EC
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Figure 6.5: View from the public highway, travelling south
72
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
EN
Figure 6.6: View from the public highway, up to the farmhouse
house gable
Principle 6.6: Use your Design n Statement fo

for driving and
IM
recording negotiations with h the LPA as the
th application progresses
and as an audit trail of proposal,
roposal, negotiation
nego and response,
should the process result
sult in an app
appeal
EC
With more complex orr sensitive pro

projects, the developing Design Statement can
otiating tool. In this context, it can:
be used as a negotiating
• set out the big picture

pi of key issues and objectives from your perspective
SP
and include
nclude any eend
endorsement of these through the pre-application
ess
ss
process
• provide a ba
base for referring to these issues and objectives and any
endorsement of these if perspective is being lost – this is a situation
which can occur when minor issues arising during the course of the
consultation are given inappropriate weight and allowed to frustrate or
conflict with the securing of the key objectives
• make it easy for case officers to use to focus discussion and negotiation
within the LPA and with external consultees
• provide a framework for identifying and potentially resolving issues in the
wider project context
• assist planning officers in justifying approvals in the event of departures
from planning policies.
73
Finally, as a design process tool, running alongside and contributing to

design development, the Design Statement can provide an audit trail as the
application proceeds towards determination and, if necessary, appeal through:
• clearly establishing the design starting point and explaining the

subsequent design development process
• clearly setting out initial areas of agreement on key objectives
• recording, if necessary, where there was divergence between the LPA’s
and the applicant’s understanding/views on the approach and the
reasons for this
• recording any attempts to get understanding and agreement back
on track.
This information will prove valuable should it be necessary

ry to narrow
narro the areas
of dispute in the event of contestation in a committee hearing, or sub
subsequently
in the conduct of an appeal.
EN
IM
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
EC
SP
74
7 Conditions
EN
IM
This chapter covers the complex
mplex issues cconcerning dealing with
conditions attached to planning consents. It looks in particular at the
nning conse
EC
submission of detailss and other ma

material to discharge conditions, and
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
ting to condit
specific issues relating conditions associated with the construction
process and thee subsequent o operation of completed developments.
Conditionss are large

largely related to RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Stages 3, 4 and 5
SP
(althoughh many key issues,

i particularly on constrained or sensitive sites,
will benefit
fit from consideration,
c at least in principle, during Stages 0 to 2).
So, you have your planning consent – but you have an outline consent
with reserved matters to be submitted or you have a consent with
conditions attached. In either case, you will have to go through the
process of submitting the required further information and getting the
conditions discharged.
In the case of conditions, pre-application discussions or discussions

during the processing of the application will ideally have resulted in a
position where none of these conditions come as a surprise. Conditions
which do come as a surprise can complicate delivery of the proposals.
In difficult situations, they can fundamentally undermine the viability of
the project.
In principle, LPAs should not attach conditions which have the practical
effect of negating the planning consent. Should you encounter this

situation, the most appropriate path may be to appeal the condition (in which
case, refer to the additional material on appeals in Chapter 9).
In more common circumstances, where there is a need to discharge rather than

challenge conditions, it is important to understand why conditions might be
needed, the different types of conditions and approaches to securing their
discharge.
Are conditions needed?
The basic principle of conditions is that they make developments acceptable,

in planning terms, which would otherwise be unacceptable. This principle is
clearly set out in Government policy as indicated in the NPPF:
F:
ceptable throu
unacceptable development could be made acceptable
EN
54. Local planning authorities should considerr whether othotherwise
through the use
nning obligatio
of conditions or planning obligations. Planning obligations should
IM
only be used where it is not possible to address unacc
unacceptable impacts
through a planning condition.
55. Planning conditions should be kept to a minimum and only
EC
imposed where they are necessary,

essary, relevant
relevan to planning and to the
development to be permitted,ed, enforceable
enforceable, precise and reasonable in
all other respects. Agreeing conditions early is beneficial to all parties
eing condition
ss and can spe
involved in the process speed up decision making. Conditions
that are required to be discharged
disch before development commences
SP
there is a clear justification.1

ded, unless th
should be avoided,
The NPPG provides clear guidance on the use of planning conditions.
Its explanation of why conditions are imposed on planning permissions is

as follows:
When used properly, conditions can enhance the quality of development

and enable development to proceed where it would otherwise have been
necessary to refuse planning permission, by mitigating the adverse
effects. The objectives of planning are best served when the power to
attach conditions to a planning permission is exercised in a way that
is clearly seen to be fair, reasonable and practicable. It is important to
ensure that conditions are tailored to tackle specific problems, rather
than standardised or used to impose broad unnecessary controls.2
76 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Conditions
7
All consents are subject to at least two standard conditions: requiring

development to be commenced within three years of approval and to be
executed in accordance with the approved drawings.
Outline planning consents will come with a requirement to submit adequate

information on all reserved matters. Above and beyond this, almost all planning
approvals will come with a (sometimes large) number of additional conditions.
As detailed in Chapter 5, there is a balance to be struck between the certainty

provided by full application submissions and the investment required in
advance of some certainty on the general acceptability of the application.
In this context, conditions, as an alternative to investment in additional
detailed design beyond the level of detail needed to secure validation of the
application, can be beneficial – but this is a strategy wh
which ideally needs to
be dealt with in pre-application discussions with due consconsideration being
given to client funding and the implications forr the extent an
and timing of related
architect’s fees. LPAs will be unwilling to relyy on conditi
ceptability of th
which they view as fundamental to the acceptability
Despite the Government’s guidance in this area, yo

the development. EN
conditions to address anything
you may find that the resource

IM
at they may wel
pressure on LPA teams is such that well use standardised conditions
and will sometimes use conditions
ions which impose
imp ‘broad unnecessary controls’.
Principle 7.1: Consider

er the ideal balance
ba between the certainty
EC
provided by more complete

omplete design
desi detail and the investment
needed to provide
de it at an early
ear stage in the design process
ea
Architects will frequently
equently be pressed
p by clients to minimise the extent of
SP
ork on proposals
detailed work propo until reasonable certainty about the acceptability
oposal
posal has be
of their proposal been secured. In our discretionary planning system,
dely
and with widely ly varying
varyi types of development and sensitivities of sites, there
vary
olut
l t in the area of the extent of detail which will be viewed
can be no absolutes
as fundamental to the determination of any particular planning application.
In this context, a key component in any pre-application discussions could
be the establishment of those elements of detailed design development
that are essential to allow the LPA to reach a decision on the principle of the
development – and which can be deferred for later detailed design within the
framework established by these key elements.
What sort of conditions might be applied?
Principle 7.2: Establish the range and nature of conditions which

the LPA is likely to attach at the earliest possible stage
Pre-application discussions should help you to establish the range and nature
of likely conditions. In the absence of pre-application discussions, or in
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
77
preparation for them if you are having them, view similar applications on the
LPA’s website. For each application, you can view the officer’s report with its
recommendation, which includes details of the conditions attached. From
this, you will be able to see what areas are being covered by conditions and
how those conditions are framed. Previewing in advance of pre-application
discussions will help you to address any particular difficulties for the project’s
viability that conditions which are likely to be applied could generate.
The most likely types of condition fall into the following categories:
• the submission of matters reserved under an outline planning consent

• the submission of specified detailed items, e.g. samples of materials
• conditions relating to the construction process
• conditions relating to the operation of the completed
ed development.
d develop
with them:
• ‘condition X must be discharged before

EN
Most conditions will have a time limit, such as the following,
ollowing, associated
ass
assoc
e development can commence

IM
on site’
d before the first
• ‘condition Y must be discharged firs
fir occupation/use of the
development’ etc.
EC
The first of the two points aboveve relates to wh

what are defined as ‘pre-
commencement conditions’. ’. In seeking to
s’. t address abuses that have been
elaying develop
seen as unnecessarily delaying development, the Government has introduced
provisions to discourage
age the ususe of tthese conditions.
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
These provisions essentially require LPAs to seek the written agreement of

ssentially req
e-comme
comme
applicants to any pre-commencement conditions that they wish to apply.
There are timescales governing
ove this process and provisions relating to the
resolution of any disputes in this area. Detailed coverage of this relatively
new area is best sourced directly from the NPPG by searching ‘The use of
pre-commencement conditions’.
Discharging conditions
Principle 7.3: Treat the management of conditions as seriously as

you treated the original planning application
Discharging conditions requires time for preparing the submission of details,
sourcing sample materials, commissioning/securing the completion of
additional reports/surveys etc.
78
Conditions
7
With complex developments, a conditions tracker spreadsheet is essential,

and even on relatively modest projects it can be a useful tool. It is particularly
valuable where time constraints apply to activities necessary to discharge
the conditions. A clear example of this is the common requirement for the
provision of a bat survey, which can generally only be conducted between April
and September – and, once conducted, is often only valid for one year. This
may or may not coincide with other time-limited survey requirements.
The complexities of seasonally restricted environmental surveys and those with

limited life spans can be very important in the management of the timing of
submission of planning applications or applications to discharge conditions.
Being aware of these limitations will help you to avoid frustration and
potentially substantial delay in the progress of applications.
The tracker should at least allow you to identify and manage time-sensitive
nd manag
activities – and will help you build time into yourur programme between the
submission of details and their likely determination
conditions, the tracker may help you to

mination by tthe LPA. As fees are
payable with each separate submission of details reque
o group
requesting discharge of EN
material to allow the submission
roup materia
of a number of conditions together in n order to reduce
redu total fees.
IM
There are time periods attacheded to LPAs’ expe
expected performance in the
discharging of conditions and,
nd, problems with protracted delay in the
d, given probl
prob
handling of conditions byy LPAs, these include
in provisions for deemed discharge
EC
in default of LPA decisions.

ions
ions.
SP
The local
al planning authority should respond to requests to discharge
ons without delay
conditions d and must give notice to the applicant of
its decision
ion within
with a period of 8 weeks, beginning with the day
immediately l ffollowing that on which the application is received, or
any longer period agreed in writing between the applicant and local
planning authority.
Where the LPA is determining an application for approval required by a
condition imposed on planning permission for EIA development, which
must be obtained before all or part of the development may be begun,
the period is 16 weeks. (Article 27 of the Town and Country Planning
(Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 and
regulation 68 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact
Assessment) Regulations).
If no decision is made to discharge the condition within 12 weeks, the
local planning authority must return the fee to the applicant without
further delay.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
79
These timeframes and the return of fees do not apply to prior approval
procedures under Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, or where
the request relates to a reserved matter, which should be subject to a
reserved matters application.
Where an applicant has concerns about the timeliness of the local
planning authority in giving notice of its decision, a deemed discharge
may be available under article 28 of the Town and Country Planning
(Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.
There is a right of appeal where an application is refused or is not
determined within the statutory timescale.3
Deemed discharge procedures EN

There have been concerns that some LPAs, in focusing their
th
the limited resources
IM
on the processing of original applications,
ns,, have been failing
fa to deal with
submissions seeking to discharge conditions
nditions in a ti
tim
timely fashion – sometimes
leaving submissions unresolved for periods. To address this
or extended per
EC
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
issue, provide a more timely response applicants and discourage LPAs
sponse for appl
app
from this behaviour, the Government
rnment has in
ernment introduced
int ‘deemed discharge’
procedures.
SP
If the applicant considers th

there is a delay in the discharge of a
condition, the ‘deemed discharge’ process may be activated (where that
med d
is permitted, and where no appeal has been made under section 78
of the 1990 Act) by serving a ‘deemed discharge’ notice on the local
planning authority.
A deemed discharge notice may only be served once one of the following
have elapsed:
• at least 6 weeks beginning with the day immediately
following that on which the application is received by the local
planning authority; or
• such shorter period as may be agreed in writing between
the applicant and the local planning authority for serving a
notice.
80
Conditions
7
If the applicant has served a deemed discharge notice and the local
planning authority fails to determine the application by the date
specified in the notice or such later date as may have been agreed in
writing, approval is deemed to have been given, with the consequence
that the condition is deemed to be discharged.4
There are a number of exceptions to the eligibility to use these procedures.

Other than in situations where the applicant has agreed with the LPA that they
should not apply, these essentially relate to applications which have major
environmental impact dimensions. The exceptions are set out in Schedule 6
to the Town and Country Planning (Development Management
anag
ag Procedure)
(England) Order 2015.
Construction EN
It is important to consider both the
e immediate
mmediate aand the wider impacts of
IM
major construction work – from sitete working hours,
h
ho through to noise control
and haulage routes to and fromom sites. Numerous
Nume television case studies,
in programmes such as Grand and
d Designs, have
h shown just how challenging
EC
nstruction can be,

the local impacts of construction b even for small projects, on tightly
tes.
es.
constrained urban sites.
ential nuisances
Many of the potential nuisance arising from construction are subject to
rough a range
regulation through ra o environmental health provisions and the
of
SP
case has been

een made thatth the temporary nature of the impacts mean that
d be more p
they should properly controlled through legislation relating to
environmentalall prot
protection, including the Control of Pollution Act 1974 or the
Environmental P Protection Act 1990. The Government has sought to provide
guidance in this area of potentially overlapping regulation though coverage in
the NPPF:
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
183. The focus of planning policies and decisions should be on

whether proposed development is an acceptable use of land, rather
than the control of processes or emissions (where these are subject to
separate pollution control regimes). Planning decisions should assume
that these regimes will operate effectively. Equally, where a planning
decision has been made on a particular development, the planning
issues should not be revisited through the permitting regimes operated
by pollution control authorities.5
81
In practice, it has left both applicants and LPAs unclear on how and where
issues are best addressed. Whether the route is proactive and anticipatory
through planning, or reactive through statutory nuisance action on
environmental health grounds, the issues will need to be addressed. Arguably,
it is safer, in terms of securing construction progress and avoiding the
associated costs and delays of disruption during construction, if potential
issues are identified and addressed in advance.
In the planning process, the usual path to exploring and addressing

potential issues in this area is a construction management plan and LPAs
frequently attach a condition to a planning consent requiring the submission
of such a plan.
While the proactive planning route is helpful in this respect, the

he attachment
of a condition requiring the submission of a construction managem
management plan
frequently only emerges as the application heads towards rds determina
determination.
A challenge in the early stages of the design processess is that the d

generally be progressing in advance of the appointment
design will
ntment of a ccontractor, and
ointment
economy of delivery is usually best secured by allowing the contractor to
EN
IM
determine the construction method within n any patterns o of constraint which
rtant to establis
the client/architect may feel it is important establish. An increasingly
challenging aspect is the management nt of site access,
ent acce
acc deliveries and
contractors’ and sub-contractors’’ vehicles, wh
whic
which is often the subject of acute
EC
short-term impacts.
Principle 7.4: Consider

er construction
constructio issues and their impact on the
immediate or widerr environmen
environment
SP
At the outset of the

e project, it is important to consider whether the nature of
he site w
the project and/or the wi give rise to issues associated with construction
will
which might have greaterter than normal impacts on the immediate or wider
environment. If this is the case, highlight these in discussion with your client
and develop a strategy for building them into the design process. If the
construction method is an important factor in this mitigating process, consider
early engagement of the contractor to assist in developing the construction
management plan.
Operation
Environmental impacts of developments on their immediate and wider contexts

are frequent causes of concern in consultation on and determination of
planning applications. These concerns are often addressed through conditions
that control various aspects of the completed development’s operation – most
typically hours of operation or maximum noise levels at the site boundary.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
82
Conditions
7
As with conditions on construction, conditions that relate to the operation

of a completed development frequently only emerge at a late stage in the
processing of planning applications. They can, however, have significant
effects on a developer’s ability to utilise the completed development in the way
they had envisaged – sometimes the impact on performance is severe enough
to render the development unviable.
Principle 7.5: Consider operational impacts on the immediate and

wider environment
Consider at the outset of the project whether your proposal, when in operation,
is likely to generate impacts on its immediate and wider context which may
constrain its use and/or require mitigation. If this is the case, consider the
implications of the potential limitations on use and poss
possible options for
mitigatory design.
EN
Over the past few years, an additional perspective
area – the management of impacts through
ective has d
deve
developed in this
gh anticipatory planning rather
than retrospectively in response to environmental
vironmental
onmental hea
health challenges on the
grounds of nuisance. This approach h introduces as a planning consideration the
IM
potential impact that the introduction
ction
tion of a new use
u through a planning consent
can have on established uses in the area. A simple
s example is complaints from
the occupants of new housingingg resulting iin statutory noise nuisance action
EC
alth legislatio
under environmental health legislation which leads to the curtailing of hours or
closure of long-established
lished
ished entertain
entertainment venues.
The ‘agent of change’
ange’ principle states
s that new development will be viewed as
ch creates an is
the factor which issue of conflict where one didn’t exist before and
SP
requires thee new devel

developm
development to take reasonable steps to protect itself from
rom
impacts fromm its establi
established surroundings.
eme
This principle emerged following a number of high-profile cases in London and
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
some other cities. It has been reflected in policy in the new London Plan and
has become mainstream through its inclusion in national policy in the NPPF:
182. Planning policies and decisions should ensure that new

development can be integrated effectively with existing businesses and
community facilities (such as places of worship, pubs, music venues
and sports clubs). Existing businesses and facilities should not have
unreasonable restrictions placed on them as a result of development
permitted after they were established. Where the operation of an
existing business or community facility could have a significant adverse
effect on new development (including changes of use) in its vicinity, the
applicant (or ‘agent of change’) should be required to provide suitable
mitigation before the development has been completed.6
83
When handling developments which could potentially give rise to conflicts,

consider the likely impacts and how they might be mitigated. Further, reflect
on whether there are aspects of the operation of the local context that might
create impacts from which your development will need to protect itself.
KEY QUESTIONS
1. Have you established which conditions are likely to be attached

to any planning consent for your project – and, ideally,
determined the likely wording of these conditions?
2. Have any conditions been attached which effectivelyy negate the
consent? If so, how does your client wish to deal with
th these?
th
3. Is your client willing to accept pre-commencement
ement conditions
conditi to
4. Have you identified any likely issues

EN
reduce the amount of detailed design work rk needed in advance of
the relative certainty of securing a planning
nning consent?
es impacting th
the actual
IM
construction of your project which
ch might raise planning issues?
If so, have you taken the following
owing steps:
a. Covered these by discussions/submissions
cussions/sub early in the
EC
planning processs to minimise their potential to frustrate

delivery of the project?
b. Sought early
arly engagement
engagemen with the likely contractor to
address and minimis
minimise or mitigate issues?
SP
5. Have youu identified any

a issues which might limit or constrain
the use off the dev
development when completed? If these are likely,
have you sought
ught early discussion with the LPA to clarify these
and explore how they might be addressed in order to:
a. minimise their impact
b. allow the client to consider alternative approaches to
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
development should these issues have the potential to

frustrate the development?
6. Have you identified any aspects of the local environment which
may impact on your client’s development and its operation when
complete? If there are any, have you discussed and agreed with
your client how these might be addressed?
84
Conditions
7
7. Have you set up a conditions tracker to detail all the conditions

attached, actions needed to discharge them and any critical
dates relating to stages in the progress of the project at which
discharge of specific conditions will be essential? In particular,
have you identified and highlighted in the project programme
any conditions where seasonal or time-specific survey work will
be needed to secure their discharge?
8. Have you been able to identify any grouping of submissions with
a view to reducing overall application fees?
9. If applications for the discharge of conditions are overrunning,
have you taken the steps required to secure e possible ‘deemed
discharge’?
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
85
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,

8
Viability, developer obligations
and agreements
bli
EN
IM
This chapter outlines the challenges
hallenges invo
involved in leveraging funding for
a range of ‘social goods’ from
rom assumed surplus value in developments,
EC
and the interplay between

ween this process
proc and the original and continuing
ments.
viability of developments.
rea is largely re
Work in this area related to RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Stages 4
and 5. Some
me aspects
aspect ideally benefit from being addressed much earlier in
SP
ess, at Stage 0 and/or 1.

the process,
ation ffor the leveraging process is based on the known or

The justification
presumed impact that developments will have, directly or indirectly,
on various elements of the local or wider physical environment and/or
social infrastructure. It can range from meeting the costs of highway
improvements off site, which are directly required to facilitate access
to the development site, through to the provision of a proportion of a
housing development as affordable housing, or contributions to the
provision of additional school places in response to the number of
additional children likely to be living in a proposed development.
The primary legal mechanisms through which this leverage is exercised

are the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Agreements under
Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, which have been
touched on earlier in this guide.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,

While detailed guidance in this area has varied with the publication of
successive Planning Policy Frameworks, the fundamental principle is that the
financial and related demands/obligations should not be such as to make a
development unviable. The relevant coverage in the NPPF gives an idea of this
principle and its operation:
Development contributions
34. Plans should set out the contributions expected from
development. This should include setting out the levels and types of
affordable housing provision required, along with other infrastructure
(such as that needed for education, health, transport, flood and water
management, green and digital infrastructure). Such policies
cies should
not undermine the deliverability of the plan.
Planning obligations
56. Planning obligations must only be sought
the following tests:
EN
ht where they meet all of
IM
a) necessary to make the developmentt acceptable in planning terms;
ment; and
b) directly related to the development;
EC
an kind to the development.1

lated in scale and
c) fairly and reasonably related
Further, in respect of CIL and viability

via assessments:
SP
57. Where up-to-datedate policies

p have set out the contributions
expected from development, planning applications that comply with
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
them should be assumed to be viable. It is up to the applicant to

demonstrate whether particular circumstances justify the need for a
viability assessment at the application stage. The weight to be given
to a viability assessment is a matter for the decision maker, having
regard to all the circumstances in the case, including whether the
plan and the viability evidence underpinning it is up to date, and any
change in site circumstances since the plan was brought into force.
All viability assessments, including any undertaken at the plan-making
stage, should reflect the recommended approach in national planning
guidance, including standardised inputs, and should be made publicly
available.2
88
and agreements 8
It is vital that clients have an early understanding of the likely calls for financial
contributions and other actions which could impact upon the profitability and,
in extreme cases, viability of proposals. While this applies to Section 106
Agreements, it is particularly applicable to CIL.
Section 106 Agreements are negotiable and attempts to seek contributions

can be tested and challenged on the basis of their impact potentially rendering
proposals unviable.
CIL contributions are not negotiable. The CIL charging schedule for each LPA
which has introduced CIL will have been the subject of public consultation and,
during this process, determination that the application of the relevant levels of
CIL will not have an impact on the viability of the development. In essence, the
presumption is that, as a known quantity, CIL will have ve b
been built into the price
at which sites change hands and its general impact act viability will have been
ct on viab
tested as part of the process in the LPA’s settingg of CIL charg
charging rates.
development proposals and make

EN
Principle 8.1: Know the CIL charge which will att
attach to
ke sure your client
cl is aware of
this at the outset
IM
Not every LPA has adopted CIL. L. Where it has been
b adopted, the CIL charging
schedule will be available on n the LPA’s we
w
website. Where CIL is in the process
EC
of being adopted by an LPA, the likely incoming

in charging schedule will
be available on their website togethe
together with the date of its introduction.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
ote that CIL will

It is important to note wi become chargeable on all applications
consented after this date, rega
regardless of the date of submission of the
applications.
SP
harging
arging rates are supposed to directly reflect the pooled cost of a
The CIL charging
ned
ed elements
range of defined ele of infrastructure across the LPA, shared between
the collection off developments
d expected within the LPA over the period of
provision of the infrastructure. As indicated above, they are also supposed to
be refined to ensure that they do not impact on the viability of development
within the LPA. As such, they will inevitably vary between LPAs. LPAs will be
aware of market differences across their areas and so might have varying rates
within their areas. Additionally, they may want to encourage or discourage
various types of development in particular parts of their areas and will use
variations in CIL rates to help achieve this aim. In London, there are two CIL
charging bodies – the LPA and the Greater London Authority (GLA), particularly
in respect of Mayoral CIL contributions to Crossrail. The CIL charging schedule
in Table 8.1 provides a useful example.
CIL is charged on net additional floor space in a development, plus any existing
floor space that has been vacant for more than six months during the three
years prior to the granting of planning permission.
89
Table 8.1: Example council CIL charges
Development type Planning use class Within [example] Rest of the Borough
Metropolitan Centre
Residential C3 £25.00 £145.00
Business B1, B2 or B8 £145.00 £25.00
Institutions C2 or D1 £25.00 £25.00
Schools, colleges, C2 or D1 Nil Nil

higher education
institution, medical and
health service
All the other uses not A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, C1, £145.00 £
£145.00
identified above C4, D2 or Sui Generis
by [example] Council.
NOTE: The example council CIL charges (per square metre of gross
actual figures.
on. Any remainde
In all cases above the first £25 per m² goes to the Mayor of London.
EN
remainder is retained
ss internal floor area

area) are based on
IM
In contrast to CIL charges, Section 106 contributions a are negotiable. They
apply to works and activities that are e more directly related to the impacts of
specific proposals and can be used ed more widely
wide in areas which do not adopt
EC
CIL. Section 106 Agreements are used to securesecu many readily definable
elements of local planning policy, such as a affordable housing provision and
local employment and training
aining provision.
provision They are used to secure funding
for specific off-site local
al infrastructure
infrastructur improvements that are essential
SP
to a development, such as highway

highwa
high or drainage improvements, without
commitment to which hich
ch the LPA would
w not be able to grant planning consent.
They can often extend d to incl
inc
include highly varied contributions to address the
assumed wider effects of proposals.
Since they are negotiable, and the centre of negotiations will be their impact
on the viability of projects, it is important to understand the likely calls for
Section 106 contributions early in the development process.
Principle 8.2: Understand the likely requirements under

Section 106 Agreements early in the design process
While it may be difficult to access full details, a review of recent planning
approvals for comparable development granted by the LPA covering the area
of your proposal should be revealing in terms of the range of things for which
Section 106 contributions/undertakings are being sought.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
90
and agreements 8
The process of negotiating a Section 106 Agreement will start with the
agreement of a set of Heads of Terms, under which the detail will be developed
and agreed. Apart from alerting you and your clients to elements which the LPA
is likely to be seeking to include, looking at the Planning Committee reports on
comparable developments may also reveal not just the scale of contributions
being required but also the factors which are being taken into account in
negotiating departures from local plan policy standards. If nothing else, this
research will give you an idea of the current negotiating climate that you may
be about to enter.
The extract reproduced below from a report on an application for an 807-unit

residential development approved by the Old Oak and Park Royal Development
Corporation Planning Committee in 2017 gives an indication of the range of
lread
ead subject to CIL.
things which are being sought in an area which is already
Recommendation
The Committee is invited to:
EN
IM
ional permission
2.1 Resolve to Grant conditional permissio subject to:
ral to the Mayor
(a) Stage II referral Mayo of London;
actory compl
(b) the satisfactory completion of a legal agreement under
EC
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
n 106 of the Tow
Section Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as
ended) to secure
amended) secu the following:
dable housing
1. Affordable
SP
a. The provision
pro of 263 affordable housing units (35% by
habitab
habitable room) comprising 68 London Affordable Rent, 78
Lond
London Living Rent and 117 Shared Ownership units;
b. A review mechanism:
i. A full re-appraisal of scheme viability to be triggered if
the permission is not substantially implemented within
24 months after the grant of planning permission;
c. Nomination rights to be allocated 70% to LBB, 10% to LBE,
10% to LBHF and 10% to pan-London.
2. Transport
a. Contribution of £536,000 towards measures to improve the
capacity of the local bus network within the vicinity of the
site;
91
b. Contribution of £1,500,000 towards the improvement of

walking and pedestrian cycling links, the public realm and
amenity spaces between the site and Park Royal Station;
c. Contribution of £25,000 towards improved wayfinding and
signage within the vicinity of the site;
d. Contribution towards consultation and, if supported
locally, implementation of a Controlled Parking Zone for the
surrounding area;
e. Occupants of the development to be prevented from
applying for parking permits in existing and future
Controlled Parking Zones;
f. Payment of car club membership for each h future residential
resid
g.
EN
Provision of a residential Travel Plan
hree years;
occupier of each residential unit for three
an Framework and £1,000
per year monitoring costs for yearss one, three and five
following first occupation;
IM
h. To secure highway worksks including pprovision of the
servicing bay on Lakeside
side Drive, cycle
cy lane extension and
EC
reinstatement of redundant crocrossover on Lakeside Drive,

cant to enter into a Section 278 agreement
with the applicant
where required.
ired.
3. Education
SP
a. A financial contribution of £3,900,000 towards the

nancial contr
rbishment a
refurbishment and expansion of primary or secondary
schoolss in the
th vicinity of the site to address the demand
arising from the development for education services;
b. The delivery of a new children’s nursery on site to a
specification to be agreed with OPDC.
4. Healthcare
a. A financial contribution of £2,048,698 towards expanding
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
primary care facilities at the Central Middlesex Hospital

to address the demand arising from the development for
healthcare services.
5. Training and skills
a. Construction pre-employment training and apprenticeships
comprising:
92
and agreements 8
i. A target of 15% of labour required for the construction

phase to be sourced from the boroughs of Brent, Ealing
and Hammersmith and Fulham;
ii. Reasonable endeavours to encourage local
sub-contracting;
iii. A minimum of ten apprenticeships during the
construction phase, paying the London Living Wage;
iv. Contribution of £30,000 towards local Training and
Employment initiatives operating within the vicinity of
the site.
6. Open space and play space
a.
for public use;

EN
Provision of the on-site open space
pace and play space
an make available
indicated in the application drawings and
b. Contribution of £20,000
000 towards pu
public art within the
IM
vicinity of the site.
7. Energy
EC
a. Connection
on to the existing
exist Decentralised Energy network on
First Central;
entral;
b. A contribution to a scheme to off-set any shortfall in carbon
savings required to achieve a Zero-Carbon
emissions sav
SP
Develo
Development equivalent to £1,800 per tonne of carbon
required to be off-set;
c. Commercial floorspace to achieve BREEAM ‘Excellent’.
Com
8. A design monitoring contribution of up to £50,000 towards
meeting the costs of independently reviewing any subsequent
amended applications or applications for the discharge of
planning conditions only payable in the event that the original
architects for the scheme are not retained for such work.
9. A marketing strategy for the SME employment floorspace.
10. Legal costs reasonably incurred by OPDC in connection with the
application.
11. All contributions to be index-linked (upwards-only).3
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
93
It is appreciated that this is a relatively complex example in a context where

much may be demanded of and sustained by a development. It does, however,
give an idea of the types of areas where commitment to financial contributions
or requirements to do or not do particular things may be added to the
conditions which might be attached to a planning consent.
When working with affordable housing as part of an obligations package, it is

particularly important to be aware of the LPA’s aspirations for the mix of types
of affordable accommodation and also their application to unit sizes if working
on a development with a range of sizes, in addition to the overall percentage
figure of affordable housing required. It is easy to appreciate the difference in
effective discount on open market value between a one-bedroom unit offered
to the intermediate market on a shared-equity basis and a three-bedroom unit
offered for social rent.
KEY QUESTIONS EN
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
1. Has the amount of CIL which the proposalsal is likely to attract been
calculated and is the client aware of this?
IM
2. Do you have an understanding ng of the areas in which the LPA is
likely to be seeking Section contributions coverage, e.g.
n 106 contribu
percentage and markett type of affordable
affor housing, education or
EC
recreation contributions?
ons
3. Have you tried to
o assess the likely
lik associated costs etc.
from a review of the require
requirements attached to similar recent
SP
developments?
ents?
94
9
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Appeals, enforcement and
using specialist support
EN
M
Appeals and enforcement action are two fundamental elements of the
planning system. The first involves the right of applicants to challenge a
refusal of their planning
ing application
application, the imposition of a condition which
unreasonabl or the failure of the LPA to make a
they consider to be unreasonable
decision on the e application within
wi the prescribed timescale (eight weeks
on for most ap
from validation applications, 13 weeks for major applications
and 16 weeks
eeks for ap
applications requiring an Environmental Impact
ent (EIA) – all
Assessment a plus any extension of time which might have been
agreed). The seco
second element is the process by which an LPA can take
nst u
action against unauthorised development.
In everyday practice, architects may encounter and have some experience

of appeals. Enforcement is much rarer and unlikely to be something of
which many architects have substantive experience.
Appeals and, particularly, enforcement activity may therefore be aspects

of planning which take architects into areas in which they feel their limited
familiarity means that their client’s interests may be best served by using
specialist planning consultancy support.
Appeals
So, despite your best efforts, you have a refusal of planning permission
or a permission with conditions attached which your client simply

cannot accept. You may simply be failing to get a planning decision within the
statutory time period, or any agreed extension to this period. Or perhaps you
have found yourself involved in enforcement action against a development or
use that is considered to be unauthorised.
All of the situations described above bring with them rights of appeal and,
in relation to planning applications, a range of options for the method of
appeal.
How should you best proceed from here in terms of exercising the rights of
appeal in the planning system or resisting enforcement action? Which aspects
do you feel you can reasonably handle yourself, and at what point are you best
served by turning to specialist support?
It is important to note that there are time limits on the making

king of appeals.
a
peal is lost.
If you fail to appeal within the time limit, the right of appeal
At the time of writing, planning appeals must be made

refusal or, in the case of non-determination, within
ade within six months
m EN
of a
in six months of the date when
hin
cement action, the appeal must
a decision should have been made. For enforcement
IM
be made within 28 days of the issue of the e enforcement n notice. As Government
changes these time limits occasionally, you are advised
advise to check the current
time limits to avoid the potential loss rights.
s of appeal righ
EC
There are four types of appeal. The character o of these in relation to the scale,
complexity and sensitivity of the he issues invo
involved is covered later in the chapter.
Appeals are handled by planning
lanning inspectors appointed through the Planning
anning inspect
Inspectorate, an executivetive
ve agency of the
t Ministry of Housing, Communities
SP
and Local Government. independent

nt. It is ind
indepen of the LPAs involved in handling the
tiating
ating enforc
applications or initiating enforce
enforcement proceedings. Inspectors are trained
to carefully follow Government
overnme planning policy and its reflection in LPAs’
overnmen
development plans and d other
oth guidance and to use these to inform their
recommendations to uphold or dismiss an appeal.
In more challenging cases, their recommendations are subject to extensive

consideration by the Minister, who, taking wider issues into consideration,
may or may not uphold the recommendations.
At the time of writing, no fees are currently charged for the making of appeals.
However, there are potentially substantial costs for appellants, based on
the professional input that will be needed to support their case. Beyond the
input of the architect and design team, the process may involve support from
planning consultancies with applicable experience. For complex appeals
being handled through the planning inquiry route, an appeal may well involve
substantial legal costs for the advice and input of solicitors, and possibly even
barristers, specialising in planning law.
96 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

using specialist support 9
Enforcement
Enforcement action under planning law is vitally important to the planning

system. Enforcement is the process through which breaches of compliance
with planning law are pursued. In essence, it is what gives the planning system
its ultimate power.
Most enforcement action relates to wholly unauthorised development

(development or a change of use which has never been the subject of a
planning application). Occasionally, it is in respect of development which
has received consent, but which has not been built in accordance with the
approved plans.
Within this context, situations in which architects mayy fin

find themselves
involved in enforcement action are those where e they have a continuing
involvement in a development:
utt the benefit o

• which is proceeding on site without of planning permission,
or
• where significant changes to are taking place during the
o the design a
ar
construction process without
hout being regularised
re
regu through the submission
of amendments or, in the
he event of major
ma
m change, a new or revised
application.
Enforcement action can an result in co

court proceedings. In respect of normal
hes of planning regulations are a civil matter and can
buildings, breaches
carry potentially
llyy substantial fi
fines and even orders for the demolition of the
ed development.
unauthorised developmen The position with respect to listed buildings
develop
and scheduled
duled monuments is potentially more serious since, in these areas,
uled monume
monum
unauthorisedd work isi subject to criminal rather than civil law.
Some detail on planning appeals
There are three main types of appeal. Ranked by increasing levels of

investment in the production of required material and timescale, these are:
• written representations
• hearings (commonly referred to as ‘informal hearings’)
• inquiries.
In addition, there is a simpler fourth form of appeal, related to householder,

advertisement and minor commercial development applications.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
97
Check the ‘Appeals’ section of the NPPG website, which provides

comprehensive details of procedures and, helpfully, gives details of the
current timescales associated with each of these four routes, which can vary
considerably over time, depending on the Planning Inspectorate’s overall
planning appeal workload.1 It also covers the circumstances in which costs
might be claimed in the event of a successful appeal.
The three main forms of appeal provide a sliding scale of intensity, broadly
related to the scale, complexity and/or sensitivity of the application and
its context.
Written representations, as the title suggests, are appeals that are simply
conducted by the appellant and the LPA providing the Planning Inspectorate
with defined documentation (essentially all the documentation on associated
with the making and determination of the application and d any addi
additional
mescales. The
clarifying or responding information) within defined timescales.
reach their decision. The parties involved can attend

EN
documentation (supplemented by a visit to the site by an inspector
inspec to allow
them to understand the site) forms the material which the inspector
inspe
inspec uses to
end the site vvisit but cannot
spond
pond to questi
engage with the inspector, other than to respond questions they may ask
IM
he
e proposals. FFollowing this, the
to aid their understanding of the site or the
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
inspector completes their report with their recomme
recommen
recommendation to uphold or reject
he inspector’s
the appeal. If the appeal is upheld, the inspector’ report will set out any
EC
ommendation to approve that the LPA must

conditions attached to their recommendation
follow in issuing the subsequent
ent planning approval.
ap
Written representations tend to be used for minor or medium-sized proposals

asy to grasp th
where it is relatively easy the issues involved and there is limited need
SP
to present arguments ts in favour of the proposal directly to the inspector.

nts
Their primary benefitt iss the limited

li work needed to make the appeal
fica
and the generally significantly shorter timescale for consideration and
determination.
Hearings are informal proceedings based on the provision of specified

documentation to the inspector within defined timescales. Under this route,
the inspector does engage directly with both the appellant and the LPA in
a hearing. Both the appellant and the LPA set out their case for or against
the proposal to the inspector. It also allows the inspector to ‘examine’ these
cases by questioning either or both of the parties to the appeal. The hearing
will also include a site visit by the inspector. The parties to the appeal can
join this site visit and answer questions from the inspector, who will seek
to clarify their understanding of the site and related issues, but they cannot
lobby the inspector. The important distinction between this type of hearing
and a full-blown planning inquiry is that the appellant and the LPA do not
get the opportunity to cross-examine each other. While other people or
98
organisations who might feel they are affected by the proposals do have the
opportunity to make their cases, they can only be questioned by the inspector
for clarification purposes and are not subject to examination by the appellant
or the LPA.
Informal hearings are a valuable option in cases which do not merit a

full-scale inquiry but where appellants might feel that there is a degree of
complexity to the argument for the development or a perceived weakness
in the LPA’s case which needs to be reinforced in representations to the
inspector.
Informal hearings will require more work in their preparation and conduct than
written representations. They generally take longer to arrange and the time
between hearing and decision is longer.
ons. Large inquiry

Inquiries are the serious end of the appeal options. in cases
dealing with major infrastructure projects can
the engagement of solicitors, or even

n last months.
opments
pments or major
cases, such as significant housing developments
mont
sensitive individual buildings, can last a week or more

majo EN
More commonplace
maj or particularly
more, and frequently involve
n barristers, sp
specialising in planning
IM
issues by both the appellant and the LPA to help shape, make and argue the
respective cases.
ould
uld feel comfor
While many architects would comfortable handling the first and even the
EC
second type of appeal,, few would feel

fee confident in approaching an inquiry
n extensive
without some, or an xtensive amount
am
amo of, specialist support.
ppeals
peals are the simplest form of appeal and are only
Householder appeals
SP
available in respect of ‘householder’

‘hou planning applications – essentially
those for residential
esidential exte
ex
extensions and roof alterations. The format of these
appeals is straightfor
straightforward.
traightfo The appeal can only be made by the person
who submitted d the related application and must be made within 12 weeks
of receiving the planning decision. Again, full guidance on procedures and
access to the forms involved can be sourced through the NPPG section
covering appeals.
Although the initial selection of the type of appeal lies with the appellant,
it is open to both the LPA to suggest and the Planning Inspectorate to require
a particular type of appeal. This can either be on the basis of a view that the
complexity or sensitivity of the issues requires a more substantive examination
than that being sought or, conversely, that the issues in question do not justify
the intensity of examination involved in a planning inquiry.
As a guide to timescales relating to the different types of appeal, the following

box provides an example from the NPPG of timescales as they stood in
November 2019.2
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
99
TIMESCALES FOR APPEALS
Planning (including listed building) appeals

These appeals will be in respect of a decision that the local planning
authority (LPA) has made in relation to a planning application other
than a householder appeal.
For appeals dealt with by written representations or a hearing:
Planning Receipt to start Start to Event to

appeal event decision
Written 5 weeks within which: ks 6 weeks
10 weeks
representations receipt to validation is 1 week
Hearings
EN
15 weeks within which:
receipt to validation is 2 weeks
eks
13 weeks 6 weeks
For appeals dealt with by an inquiry:

IM
ollowing an inq
Planning appeals that are decided following inquiry do not have a
separate ‘validation’ stage. Instead,
ad, when the appeal
ap is started, the
start letter declares the appeall to be valid, and
an the necessary validity
EC
checks will have been carried

ed out so that a an inquiry can arranged.
Planning appeal Receipt

ceipt to start Start to event Event to decision
SP
Inquiries 9 weeks 31 weeks 7 weeks
cluding advertisement
Householder (including a consent and other minor
als
commercial) appeals
These are appeals relating to refusal for development associated
with a house, such as a rear extension or roof alteration, refusal to
display an advertisement or sign and refusal for minor commercial
development, such as ground floor alterations like shop fronts and
security shutters.
Householder Receipt to start Start to Event to

appeal event decision
Written 7 weeks within which: 5 weeks 4 weeks
representations receipt to validation is 1 week
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
100
The scale, level of complexity and sensitivity of applications tend to be

the primary factors in deciding which appeal route should be pursued.
Development proposals at the lower end of these scales are unlikely to justify
handling through the inquiry process. Conversely, complex appeals on major
applications are unlikely to be handled through written representations.
Checking and conveying to clients the likely timescales for the various types of
appeal and advising them of the most appropriate path is a valuable exercise.
The timescale aspect is particularly important when handling applications
where there appears to be a prospect of very protracted decision-making on the
part of the LPA. Planning regulations establish reasonable timescales for the
determination of planning applications of eight weeks for normal applications
and 13 weeks for applications for ‘major development’, defined in Chapter 5.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The timescale governing the processing of the application

plication starts on the date
the application was validated, not the date on which it was ssubmitted. Once
EN
the eight or 13 weeks (as appropriate) has elapsed, the applicant
of appeal on the grounds of ‘non-determination’
they have agreed in writing to a request
ap has a right
ination’ of the application,
st from
a unless
rom the LPA for an extension of time.
Once an applicant has submitted an n appeal on the basis of non-determination,
IM
the LPA is debarred from determining
ining application, which will now fall to be
ning the applic
app
nspectorate, although
determined by the Planning Inspectorate, a
alt the LPA can indicate the
decision that it would have
e made had the application not been appealed.
EC
The challenge for applicants

licants and the architects acting as their agents is to
select the path thatt is most likely to
t achieve the earliest successful outcome
– hence the importance
ortance of checking
chec current appeal timescales on the
NPPG website.e.
SP
ning
ng inquiry’ is
The ‘planning i at the extreme end of the processing scale. Even
setting aside
e the huge
hug inquiries into major developments, with the most
hu
ein
i Heathrow’s Terminal 5 which lasted for 524 days, planning
notable case being
inquiries can be complex and both financially and professionally demanding.
Principle 9.1: Make maximum use of your Design Statement in

preparing your input into appeal proceedings
Referring to the guidance given in Chapter 6, it is important to make the most
of your early work when preparing for appeal proceedings. A Design Statement
should demonstrate your understanding of and response to all the elements
which have shaped your proposals. If submitted with the application, it will
form part of the documentation to which the inspector will refer. A well-drafted
Design Statement will form the clearest possible exposition of the design
process which has led to and justified the proposals and provides a record of
the handling of areas of challenge and response during the progress of the
application.
101
You may need to add little to it to make your appeal submission, or your
contribution to the submission of any planning specialist with whom you
are working.
The architect’s role in appeals

Architects will have an input into the handling of cases concerning the
applications they have prepared but will typically play different roles
depending on the scale, complexity and sensitivity of the application and the
related route.
Most appeals by written representations should be capable of being

handled by architects with little or no specialist support, as such appeals are
handled solely through the submission of written statementss and an the inspector
iries,
does not engage directly with either of the parties. In inquiries,s, arc
architects are
likely to make specified contributions within frameworks ks set out by a planning
discussing its implications and options for making EN

bsorbing cas
consultant and/or legal team, who will be used to absorbing case in
g the case with the
ngss on the mate
applicant’s design team and giving clear briefings mat
material
information,
they need to
help them make and sustain the case for the e proposals.
IM
ole of the architect
The area of least clarity regarding the role archit is the hearing route.
xamine each of
In these appeals the inspector can examine o the parties to test and
clarify their understanding of each h party’s case but
b the two parties do not
EC
cross-examine each other. Some me architects will

wi feel confident in preparing the
required documentation and d handling th
the hearing. Depending on personal/
nce of hearings and the complexity of the specific
practice levels of experience
volved,
lved, you may
case and the issues involved, ma feel equal to the task.
SP
You may, however,, feel that som

some support from specialists will maximise the
s.. Suppor
prospects of success. Suppo
Support is most likely to come from planning consultants
priat
i
with experience appropriate to the project, who could help to prepare the
documentation and either handle proceedings for you in the hearing or help
you prepare for the hearing – for example, coaching you on probable lines of
questioning from the inspector and how best to respond to them.
Some detail on enforcement
It is far less likely that architects will find themselves directly embroiled
in activity prompting or flowing from enforcement action. The rarity of this
situation means that it features very infrequently in an architect’s package
of experience and expertise. Common sense would therefore lead one to
suggest that, in these circumstances, clients should seek specialist support
from planning consultants and/or solicitors specialising in planning matters.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,`
102
Principle 9.2: Make sure your terms and conditions of service

and your contract for working on any project clearly define the
scope of your services
Whether using the RIBA’s Standard Professional Services Contract or another
form of contract formalising engagement, architects should clearly define the
scope of services which they are offering. Being contractually clear on the
extent of your engagement should, hopefully, avoid your being drawn into
enforcement activity. If, having secured planning consent, your contracted
commission does not extend to an inspection role throughout the construction
process, issues flowing from a departure from the approved plans are beyond
your remit. Any work to address the concerns highlighted by the enforcement
notice would need to form part of a further contract off sservice.
If your contract does include an inspection role, itt would be wise to alert your
EN
client to the potential for enforcement action, should they ch
from the proposals for which planning permission
mission has b
Should you become involved in trying to address a ch

choose to depart
been
bee secured.
challenge to development
through an enforcement notice, thee section of the NPPG on ‘Enforcement and
IM
post-permission matters’ provides guid to procedure.3
ess a clear guide
While there may have been informal

nformal exchanges
excha
exch about any breach of planning
EC
control, the formal process ss starts with the

ess th LPA serving an enforcement notice.
It gives details of the alleged breach of planning control, the reasons for the
LPA initiating the enforcement
nforcement proprocedure
pr and a timescale within which the
breach must be remedied.
SP
The enforcement
ement notic
notice ca
can be appealed, but the appeal must be lodged
before the remedy set out in the notice. It is worth noting that time can
e date for rem
reme
sence
nce here.
be of the essence he
In practice, LPAs’ general operating principle with regard to enforcement, in

respect of irregular development rather than changes of use, is to start by
requiring submission of a planning application to regularise the development.
The processes involved in this procedure are no different from the standard
processes, except for the starting point, where it is clear what is being
proposed (i.e. what has been built) and also what specific concerns the LPA
has about the development.
The architect’s role at this stage is likely to be focused on trying to establish

reasonable means of altering what is already built in order to address the
reason for the enforcement notice – or to assist in challenging the enforcement
notice through the enforcement appeal process.
The word ‘assist’ is used advisedly. Unlike the world of planning appeals,
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,
planning enforcement is not an area in which many architects will have
103
experience. Even for most planning consultancies, it will be an area where their
experience is limited. The complexities of appealing an enforcement notice
and the importance to the client of being as successful as possible in this
endeavour are both considerable since, more often than not, it is vital to the
protection of what is often substantial investment in the property concerned.
Principle 9.3: Make clear to clients any limitations of experience

in the relatively rare area of work involved in handling and
appealing enforcement notices
While many architects will have experience of appeals, few will have similar
experience of the much rarer issue of enforcement. It is an area where the best
service an architect can offer to their client will generally be to research
planning consultancies and/or legal advisers to find one or more ore with a
reasonable portfolio of experience in enforcement – and,, ideally, broadly
bro
comparable enforcement cases.
EN
KEY QUESTIONS
IM
1. If you encounter the need too appeal the refusal
r or non-
determination of an application,
cation, do you
yo feel you have sufficient
EC
experience and expertise

tise to allow you
y to defend your client’s
interests with reasonable confidence?
nable confiden
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
2. Do you feel ablee to give your cclient sound advice on whether or
not to appeal??
SP
a. If so,
o, which type of appeal route should you to seek to
follow?
ow?
b. If not, are you able to identify appropriate expert support?
3. Have you defined your role in relation to a potential appeal or
enforcement activity in your scope of services and related fee
basis?
4. Are you reasonably prepared to either define and address the
issues yourself or clearly outline them to your expert support?
5. If pursuing the appeal or enforcement activity yourself, do you
have a clear understanding of the procedural requirements and
related timescales?
6. Have you drafted your Design Statement for the development on
the basis of its potential use in an appeal situation? Have you
drawn from it as much support for your case as you can?
104
10 Proactive engagement
shaping and operation
nt with the
tion of
the planning system
tem EN
IM
This final chapter outlines the ways in which
wh architects can help to
shape the operation of thee planning systems
sy that they engage with
EC
and, ultimately, the systems thems

themselves. Proactive engagement with
the planning system m helps to ma
make it more sensitive to architects’
needs, which encourages
ncourages and supports the production of quality design
ough the adop
outcomes through adoption of sensitive, responsive policy and
SP
guidance and its ap

application in practice.
Having worked through

th the areas where architectural activity and the
stem interface, you will have an appreciation of the numerous
planning system
components of the planning system and its day-to-day operation through
LPAs and their planning officers.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
In principle, the democratic framework within which the system

functions means that all elements of the system are subject to public
consultation. Consultation is, theoretically, driven by the wish to inform,
sensitise and legitimise policy, guidance and operational methods.
However, there are issues concerning awareness of and willingness to
engage with consultation opportunities – and, possibly, a perception
that it is not worth spending time and energy on this because it will make
no difference.
To take an alternative view, the growth of neighbourhood planning, with

over 3,000 communities shaping their own plans, is a clear indication that
many are aware of the difference that engagement can make.

There are two distinct but overlapping areas where architects can proactively
engage in shaping how they work in terms of policy and guidance, and how
these operate in local authority planning services. We can define these areas
as ‘influencing the planning system’ and ‘influencing its operation’ and review
the main areas of opportunity below.
Influencing the planning system
Systemic influence can be split between national and local policy and guidance
(including neighbourhood plans).
National
Engagement opportunities tend to support broad review of the plan planning
system or particular areas of policy, from issues such ass revisions to tthe
NPPF through to permitted development rights. Consultation
and a clear consultation timetable and response

cific
Government using publications that include specificific consultati
EN
sultation is conducted
consultatio
ccon
consultation questions
While individuals
se format. Whil
Whi
by
can, and do, engage with these consultations,ns,

s, the majority of responses come
IM
through organisations.
In areas that impact directly or indirectly

rectly
ctly on archite
archit
architecture and its operating
EC
environment, the RIBA would expectpect to prepare

prepar and submit responses. The
RIBA draws on a number of supporting
upporting
pporting memb
member advisory groups, including
pe the principle
its Planning Group, to shape principles and details of its response.
Expressing interest in joining
ining one of ththese groups, either as an attending or
the
mber, is an effec
a corresponding member, effective way to engage with and contribute
SP
practical experience,
ce,
e, concerns, ideas
id and suggestions to the discussion.
In addition, memberss can communicate

co their views to the Group at national
eg planning policy (i.e. NPPF/NPPG level) and to
level on matters of strategic
regional groups (by contacting their RIBA regional office) regarding local
planning issues, as detailed below.
Local
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Local area level matters are most likely to generate engagement from
individuals. Issues are much closer to home; the people and organisations
involved are better known and feel more approachable and, potentially, more
readily influenced.
Even at a local level, architects are likely to have varying views on the relevance
and accessibility of the various tiers of the planning document hierarchy,
from the Development Plan Scheme through local plans and supplementary
planning documents to validation requirements and design guidelines. While
106
Proactive engagement with the shaping
and operation of the planning system 10
engagement with the most detailed end of this hierarchy is still potentially
beneficial, you may find that their content is already constrained by the more
strategic documents.
The RIBA is encouraging and supporting the establishment of Regional

Planning Groups to bring together at a local level those people who have an
interest in or concern about the local interface with planning.
Whether you choose to seek out and join a group like this or engage personally
with consultation on these local elements of the planning system, your active
engagement has the potential to increase the sensitivity of the eventual system
components to the needs of those who use them.
n elements on the
The following sections cover the hierarchy of the main
LPA side.
Development Plan Scheme

The Development Plan Scheme (DPS) sets
EN
etss out the timetable
timet
time for the preparation
of the LPA’s local plan and identifies and schedules intended publication dates
ainly classified as supplementary planning
for the supporting documents – mainly
IM
documents (SPDs).
It will show you the broad pattern

ttern of the LLPA’s planning policy activity – what
EC
will be worked on, when n and the areas

areas/
areas/topics identified for particularly
detailed coverage to help you plan tthe nature and timing of your engagement
in elements which h you have conc
concerns about.
As the DPS is itself the subje

subject of public consultation, there is the opportunity
SP
s views on its tim

to express timings and content – for example, challenging the
n respect of the urgency of addressing some particular key issues
timetable in
or challengingg the content
c in terms of further issues which might warrant the
more detailed coverage offered by inclusion in the list of SPDs.
Local plan
The local plan is identified in the DPS. It must go through a number of rounds
of statutory consultation and moves steadily from a broad focus on vision and
principles to increasing levels of detail. It is helpful to engage from the outset
to minimise the potential for finding yourself challenging the implications of
something that has already been consulted upon and established in principle.
As regular users of the system, and being accustomed to the implications of

existing policies for places and their work, architects are well equipped to
understand the ramifications of revised or new policies and bring these into
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
play in consultation responses.
107
These responses can be individual, made as a contribution to a locally

organised RIBA response or as a contribution to a local community response.
Supplementary Planning Documents

Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) can cover a specific area or a
particular type of activity. They are supposed to assist in the application of
planning policies rather than introducing additional levels of control. Their
focus can help to clarify how policies will work and what sort of outcomes they
will produce.
This is part of the system where architects can readily relate to the
implications of policy and its envisaged application, either through familiarity
with a particular type of use or thematic area or due to their familiarity
am with
development issues in the geographic area covered by the e SPD.D
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
While there is also the potential for engaging through

community groups, well-informed individual responses
onses
fined
ned documen
impact in consultation on these more tightly defined
EN
h professional o
or
ses can have a substantial
documents.
IM
Guidelines – design codes and design
gn guides
Engagement by architects is particularly
arly
rly helpful in sh
shaping
s guidelines, codes
and guides as these are often the point nt at which local
l policy becomes most
EC
precise and prescriptive. If poorly

rly prepared in terms
t of their text or illustrative
images, they can be very frustrating
rating to work with when very literally applied in
strating
practice by planning staff.
Engagement with the e preparation

preparati of these, or by response to consultation on
SP
them in draft form, can help the

them develop into much more valuable documents.
A useful precept in engagement

ngagem
gagem is to ensure that the principles applied
are well-considered and ssound, and that the desired outcomes are clear,
reasonable and realistic. All too often these elements are lost in highly detailed
coverage of particular aspects and ‘good/bad’ example illustration.
Validation lists
Draft lists of local validation requirements are subject to regular review and
statutory consultation. Given that every LPA will already have an adopted list,
the consultation will be on continuation or variation of this list. If you have
concerns about what you consider to be unreasonable topics or qualifying
thresholds, this is the opportunity to make and argue the case for change.
Again, while this engagement can be done on an individual basis, a collective
submission with others who share your concerns may have greater impact.
Both guidelines and validation lists are likely to be topics of discussion in
meetings of Planning or Development Management User Groups.
108
Other consultations
There are various other consultation and engagement opportunities – some
formally required, such as that on the proposed CIL charging schedule,
others locally determined. Most local authorities run consultation websites
which you can register with. These send you alerts when a consultation
opportunity is open in respect of a topic or area in which you have expressed
an interest.
Influencing the planning system’s operation
Many LPAs run organisations which allow them to meet with regular users of
their services. The meetings are generally structured
d to:
• allow the LPA to explain changes in legislation

lation with wh
which they are having
to work
• explain local action in terms of new
they are working on
w or amended policy
p
EN
or guidance which
IM
(both of these are aimed at increasing
easing understanding in the user community)
sing understa
unders
• allow users to express o the service and suggest ways in

s their views on
EC
mprove
mproved.
which it might be improved.
The following exampleple from an EEng

English council’s planning user group for
agents is typical of the nature and
an scope of such groups.
a
SP
If you regularly
egularly m
make planning applications in [city], you can join our
planning user ggroup.
You’ll get to meet planning managers and officers to talk about
planning in [city]. Topics could include:
• changes to national planning policy
• planning process and practice changes
• a review of how planning works in [city].
The planning user group also visits sites to look at and review finished
development.
If you have a concern about the way a specific application was handled,
you won’t be able to discuss this at the user group.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
109
Where these groups work in more complex areas of local government,

particularly the two-tier arrangements in shire counties, they can be highly
revealing of the issues involved in working between authorities.
Joining this type of group can be helpful in a number of ways. Apart from
the opportunity to express concerns and suggest potential improvements,
such groups allow practitioners to meet in an environment which promotes
the sharing of experience. This can lead to further conversations outside
the meetings and the potential to generate considered expressions of
collective concerns, which may prove more effective than the pursuit of
individual concerns.
In the two-tier context, architects may find themselves providing valuable

collective user experience to inject into discussion between dist
ist
districts and
counties, particularly in the area of highway requirements.
s.
The bottom line in all this is to try to avoid the expenditure

energy raging against elements of the planning system
when you had, but did not use, the opportunities
your concerns.
EN
diture of tim
time aand
ystem and its operation
es to influence it
op
o
i to address
IM
Neighbourhood plans
EC
Neighbourhood planning is currently

urrently being w
widely adopted. At the time of
ties have take
writing, over 850 communities taken advantage of this and produced
neighbourhood plans which successfully been through a local
hich have succe
tion,
ion, over 2,400 communities are actively working on
referendum – in addition,
SP
further plans.
In the largely rural areas

reas which
whic have parish councils, it is these which have
as whi
moti and organising neighbourhood plans. In the
to take the lead in promoting
generally urban areas which do not have parish councils, local people have to
set up a formally constituted Neighbourhood Plan Forum.
Most of the work on these plans is undertaken by community members

who have limited understanding of the planning system. They can also
often struggle to critically analyse their neighbourhoods and conceive how
development might impact on or positively benefit them. In all these areas,
architects may find that their skills would be warmly welcomed.
You may encounter a neighbourhood plan under development in the area

where you live or where your practice is based. Equally, you may encounter
them in areas where your practice is working – or you might feel that one of
these areas would benefit from a neighbourhood plan, if only someone would
initiate one.
110 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

The RIBA has undertaken research into architects’ potential relationships with
neighbourhood planning – 2011 saw the publication of a two-part RIBA guide
to localism: Opportunities for architects.
Whether and how you engage with neighbourhood planning will depend on
your relationship with particular areas and your motivation for engagement –
which can range from protection of interests in the area you live in, through
helping to shape a more amenable context in areas in which you work, to a
deep social commitment to the residents of deprived areas facing potential
environmental and development challenges.
Regardless of the motivation for engagement, architects have much to offer

this process of helping to shape better places – and helping to shape the
planning environment in ways which allow them to deliv
eliv better placemaking
deliver
through their work in practice.
KEY QUESTIONS
EN
he opportuniti
1. Are you familiar with all the opportunities to engage with the
IM
planning system:
a. nationally and
d locally through
throu the RIBA
EC
b. through LPAs
P and their
thei user groups
c. through
ugh any form
formal or informal consultation processes
d. organ
through organisations such as chambers of commerce
SP
e. through local RTPI activity?

2. Have you made the most of all opportunities to express your
views
ws on and contribute to the development of local plans,
policies and guidelines?
3. Have you engaged with and contributed as far as possible to any
neighbourhood plans for the areas in which you live or work?
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
111
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Appendix A
Heritage, Design and

Access Statement example
Proposals for alterations and extension

to Tedham Farm, Sparty Lea, Hexham,am,
Northumberland
Content
EN
1. Introduction
IM
2. Design Process
2.1 Assessment
Physical
EC
Response
nse to Policies
Response Design Guidance and how this
sponse to Desig
has affected proposals
pr
SP
2.2
2 Evaluation
Evalua leading to the Proposed Design
3. The
he Final Layout
Layo and Appearance of this Application
Porches,
Porc windows and roof materials
4. Sustainable Building
5. Access
6. Conclusion
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

1 Introduction in more detail under the Design

Process. A large part of the house
1.1 This statement aims to provide is aesthetically unpleasing and the
supporting information not already solution proposed creates a chance
included in the planning application to give the AONB a building more
forms and is intended to assist in suited to this prominent location.
understanding of the accompanying
drawings. It has been written in the 2 Design Process
context of the government’s National
Planning Policy Framework, and will 2.1 Assessment
address relevant local plan policy Physical
and guidance.
2.1.1 Tedham Farm is within walking
Planning Permission is sought for distance of the hamlet of Sparty
let o
alterations and extensions to a Lea and 4 miles from the ttown of
farmhouse building in the North
Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural
Beauty. This original small traditional
upland farmhouse was extended on
EN
Allendale, the
centre. It adjoins Allend
service
e local key serv
Allendale Common.
2.1.2 It iss in an area whose economy

its north elevation many years ago now w relies mainly on sheep farming
IM
with a two storey, rendered flat-roof and tourism. It has since Edwardian
extension which is very visually times been a popular area for holiday
dominant on the road from Allendale kers. This farmhouse would benefit
makers.
EC
to Allenheads, a major route within

hin from radical aesthetic improvement
the AONB (B6295). It also has a more i
given that it is highly visible from a
recent single storey porch extension significant tourist route.
on its south elevation.
2.1.3 This farmhouse is not part of
SP
The new owners wishsh to make ththis a typical grouping of farm buildings
their long-term home,
me, but as it as found in much of the AONB. It
stands the accommodation
ation would was always set resolutely distinct,
be unsuitable for reasons explained with other farm buildings close by
A.1: The south elevation of the traditional A.2: Looking from the highway to the north west
farmhouse with added porch corner
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
114
Appendix A: Heritage, Design and
A.3: A view from the house
rather than attached. The whole wider

grouping, however, is familiar in its
context with regard to its simplicity of
scale and design.
The regression mapping (Figures A.6

to A.9) shows how the neighbouring
E
buildings are set at a discrete
IM
distance from Tedham Farm. A.4, A.5:
A The typical traditional farm group is
small and compact. The ambitious agricultural
sm
2.1.4 The very modest original al improvements of the 18th and 19th century
EC
along the arable East coast had little impact on

farmhouse accommodation tion is this difficult farming terrain where climate and
evident, with an integral
ral two storey topography prevented an adequate return on
investment. Because farming was small scale
barn structure attached
ached to its east,
eas and predominantly pastoral certain types of
all being under the same roof profile buildings, gin gangs and machine sheds were
rarely needed. Only in the more prosperous
SP
and with chimney stacks at each end.

mney stac lower dales would more extensive groups of
The barn was
as formerly a byre with loft buildings appear.
above. There
re is also an original lean-
to coal house on th
the south elevation, are of a very similar size as those on
as seen in Figure A.4. the farmhouse. The infill stonework
in these recesses would appear to
2.1.5 The whole of the original
be original, an unusual contrivance
building is of random stone
given the building’s otherwise
construction with typical quoin,
austere simplicity, and there is no
lintel and cill detailing. The strongly
bedded sandstone around openings, evidence internally of these windows
rather than large quoins, is typical of having been infilled. It is also
the Allendale area. puzzling that the east chimney stack
seems to serve no purpose other
2.1.6 An unusual feature is the than architectural symmetry (unless
infilled/blind south facing window the raised door opening on the east
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
recesses to the upper barn area, gable is a later addition with the
whose window rebates externally breast removed).
115
1865 A.6: The farm was well established by 1865, 1958 A.8: The rather fuzzy 1958 map once again
as can be seen here. The main body of the does not show an extension in this location.
farmhouse (to the left of ‘Tedham’) is much as it is
today in footprint, except there appears to already em
1977 The 1977 map [map removed] now indicates
be a small extension to the north. print of the current flat
what is presumably the footprint
roof extension and also
so a small bui
building in the
‘nook’ of the north east corner.
1989 Little has changed by 1898 as seen in

the map [some OS maps removed for copyright
reasons].
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
1899 A.7: However, by the turn of the century the

small extension to the north is no longer recorded.
(This may have been a simple lean-to functional
farm building.)
Current OS A.9: The current OS plan also shows this
additional small footprint and a recent photograph
indicates that a low structure was still in place until
1922 In 1922 [map removed] a smaller northerly quite recently (Figure A.10). This was removed
extension is shown. before the ownership of the applicants.
A.10
116
2.1.7 The farmhouse appears to be a

form of Longhouse, a house generally
one room deep with a byre to one
side and a loft over, not generally
associated with this location (more at
home in other parts of the AONB). The
loft/barn area is also reminiscent of a
Cumbrian bank barn, accessible from
higher ground at the east gable.
2.1.8 The pitched roofs of the original

building, assumed to have been A.11
stone, have been replaced with
asbestos profiled roof sheeting, Response to Policies
which will need to be removed under 2.1.133 All planning applications
licence. The lean-to roof of the coal
house is also of corrugated material.
The porch has a clay tiled roof, totally
out of keeping with this vernacular.
EN st be considere
must considered against the
Policies in the relevant local authority
Developmen
Development Plan Policies, and
thereafter
hereafter against relevant guidance
IM
2.1.9 The original sliding sash and all other material planning
windows have been replaced with top considerations. In this instance
cons
opening double glazed units.. h Tynedale Local Development
the
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Framework Core Strategy,

EC
2.1.10 Dry-stone wallingng is very Tynedale Local Plan and Allendale

hin much of the
visually evident within th Neighbourhood Development Plan
curtilage of the farmhouse itse
itself, have been referred to, and also the
pr
although the whole of the property National Planning Policy Framework.
SP
extends to around 12.5 acres with

d divisions o
further field of dry-stone 2.1.14 NPPF
walling. Paragraph 14 of the National
2.1.11 The building is not listed Planning Policy Framework gives a
but we view it as being so visually presumption in favour of sustainable
dominant in a designated sensitive development. Local planning
area, that the heritage of the building authorities should grant permission
needs to be taken into account. unless any adverse impacts of
doing so would significantly and
2.1.12 There is a right of way for demonstrably outweigh the benefits
Tedham Cottage to its south east, and when assessed against the policies
also to the converted barn (Tedham in the Framework taken as a whole
Barn) to its north. These routes will be – or specific policies indicate
unaffected by the proposals. development should be restricted.
It is made quite clear that a

fundamental objective of the NPPF
117
is that local planning authorities environmental conditions in the

should look for solutions rather AONB, this benefits both the social
than problems, and decision and economic values by making the
takers at every level should seek to AONB a more attractive place for
approve applications for sustainable visitors and local people.
development where possible; that
local planning authorities should Sustainability also covers energy use
work pro-actively with applicants considerations. The works to improve
to secure developments that this farmhouse will vastly improve its
improve the economic, social and sustainability credentials.
environmental conditions of the area.
Whilst this original farmhouse is
We cannot stop growth and not designated as a heritage asset
change. Planning decisions need it is clearly a visible part
pa of the local
to be relevant and proportionate. story.
character and history.
Sustainable development is
about positive growth, making
economic, environmental and
social progress for this and
EN
2.1.15 Locall Policies
e Local Plan P
Tynedale Policy GD2:
future generations: improving • The design will

w be appropriate
IM
conditions in which people live, to the cha
character of the site
work, travel and take leisure. and its surroundings given
the constraints
c created by the
EC
able
Heritage assets, an irreplaceable existing
e extension.
resource, should be conserved ved
• The development will provide
in a manner appropriate e to
a more visible new access into
their significance, andd should the dwelling and better views
SP
se so that
be put to viable use of the approach to the building,
they can be enjoyed
yed for their thus assisting with a feeling of
he quality of life
contribution to the deterring crime and increasing
of this and future generations.
enera personal safety.
The proposals should respond
to local character and history, • The design does not create conflict
reflecting the identity of local between adjacent land uses and
there will be no adverse effect
surroundings and materials
on adjacent land or buildings in
while not discouraging or
terms of loss of light, noise, or
preventing appropriate
other disturbance, overbearing
innovation. appearance or loss of privacy.
The three tenets of sustainability are Tynedale Local Plan Policy GD4:
economic, social and environmental.
In the case of this application, the • The access to the site will remain
environmental issues outweigh the as it is, and the proposal will add
others, although it could be argued no additional traffic requirements
that by improving the aesthetic to or within the site.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
118
Tynedale Local Plan Policy NE9: The Core Strategy States two
important premises which are highly
• Whilst re-shaping badly formed significant for this application:
extensions to an original
farmhouse, the proposals will ‘The high quality landscape
add only a small amount of is one of the key features of
additional volume to the existing Tynedale and has become
building. There will be no increasingly important to
impact on the openness of the an economy significantly
surrounding countryside. influenced by tourism’ and
Tynedale Local Plan Policy NE15: ‘The built heritage of the District
is also one of its key assets and
• The landscape qualities of helps to make the landscape
the North Pennines Area of distinctive’.
ve’.
Outstanding Natural Beauty will
• Thee house which
whic is the subject
be enhanced by improving the
scenic quality.
Tynedale Local Plan Policy NE27:

EN app
of this application
route frequ
is sited on a
frequently used by local
a visitors alike; the
people and
distin
distinctive landscape is not
IM
print
• There will be limited new footprint wel served by the existing
well
erefore
to this development and therefore extension to the house – it is
rrent
it is unlikely to disturb current in a position where it visibly
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
wildlife. A bat report iss submitted dominates the house itself

EC
with the application. n. and is highly prominent in the

landscape.
cy BE1:
Core Strategy Policy
Core Strategy Policy GD1:
• The proposals
sals will cconserve and
SP
enhancee the quality of the built • The proposals represent

environment.
ment. development limited to the reuse
of existing buildings in open
We can confirm that in relation to countryside – in accordance with
Policy BE11 the existing buildings this policy.
are of permanent and substantial
sound construction – no significant Core Strategy Policy NE1:
rebuilding will be required. A report • This development will minimise
was prepared by Crawford Higgins the risk of environmental damage
Associates (Building Surveyors and avoid the urbanisation of the
and Structural Engineers) for the countryside – in accordance with
applicants before they purchased. this policy.
No significant structural distortions
were evident and there was no sign Tynedale Local Plan Policy GS2: The
of any external or internal cracking relevant parts of this policy state –
of masonry to indicate any recent Development will be required to
movement. respect the positive characteristics
119
of the District’s natural and built in the countryside including those

environment and to conform to the in the Green Belt, will be allowed if
following design criteria: proposals:
(a) The design should be (a) are sympathetic to the character
appropriate to the character of of the original building and do
the site and its surroundings, not substantially increase its
existing buildings and their size;
setting, in terms of the
scale, proportions, massing, (b) comply with Policies H33 and
positioning and appearance H34.
of buildings, use of materials,
structures and landscaped Proposals which will result in
and hard surfaced areas. dit
disproportionate additions over and
Detailed plans will be expected above the size of the original
orig building
rmitted.
will not be permitted.
to include a survey of the
existing site and its immediate
surroundings, and the retention
of features of value (e.g.:
EN
• Sadly the
he existing extensions,
the north facing flat
extension in pa
e
fl roof
particular, already
archaeological remains, areas of
IM
break these ‘rules’. We are
open space within settlements, attempting
attemptin to mitigate past
trees, hedgerows and water wrongs.
wrongs This also applies
features); in re
relation to policies H33
EC
(extensions
(e to existing dwellings)
(e) the design will not create conflict and H34 (accommodation of
between adjacent land d uses; additional people). No additional
(f) there will be no adverse
erse effect
eff living accommodation will be
SP
provided – only re-arranged –

nd or buildin
on adjacent land buildings,
other than conversion of the upper
in terms of losss of light, no
noise or
floor original loft storage space
other disturbance,, over
overbearing
above the byre.
appearance or loss of privacy.
2.1.16 Response to Allendale
• The proposals will respect the
Neighbourhood Development Plan
characteristics of the area.
Justification for the proposed This project falls in the centre of
design and its appropriateness
the area covered by the Allendale
to the character of the site and
Neighbourhood Development Plan.
its surroundings is discussed in
The policies relevant to this project
detail in the next section. The
proposals will not create any have been read and we feel that we
conflict with adjacent land uses. comply fully with the aspirations set
out in the Plan, which highlights
Tynedale Local Plan Policy H20: The a positive vision for the area. Our
relevant parts of this policy state – detailed design response reflects
Extensions to residential properties this.
120 --`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

• New development along the East All development shall avoid harm
Allen valley should be delivered to the significance of social, built,
to benefit the whole community, historic, cultural and natural heritage
allowing it to thrive. assets of the Parish.
• Policies are set out encouraging
Development is not restricted to
homes and businesses to be built
Allendale Town or other specified
and expanded in accordance
with local needs and aspirations, settlements. Where development
whilst respecting what is special is proposed beyond established
about the area, conserving the settlements, such as on farmsteads
landscape and all other aspects of or where it would be associated with
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
the designation as an AONB. other groups of rural buildings, it
is intended that such development
• There is a wish to allow adaptation
ited to being within a
must be limited
to suit the changing needs of the
ible curtilage
discernible curtilag of the existing
local population.
• There is a desire to reduce the
level of finite resources used to
meet development (by reuse or
EN ding or group o
building
policies reg
of buildings.
w have read the

Additionally we
regarding scale of housing
recycling). develo
development and extensions
IM
• There is strong support from
m to dw
dwellings. These aspects are
the community in encouraging
aging di
discussed further in the detailed
appropriate new development.
elopme section on final layout and
EC
appearance.
The general development
ment principles
princip
are: Community engagement
responses suggest that the
SP
All development
ment shall be designed current approach to extensions
and located d having regard
reg to the to dwellings in the open
principles and advic
advice set out in countryside is seen locally
the North Pennines
nines AONB Building as overly prescriptive. The
Design Guide (2011) and the North Plan establishes a criterion
Pennines AONB Planning Guidelines based policy which relies
(2011) and any other relevant design on a judgement being made
guidance for AONB areas extant at regarding the scale and design
time the application is determined. of extensions in comparison to
It shall be located to ensure that it the host dwelling, that is: the
does not significantly and adversely dwelling as it exists at the time
affect the: the extension is proposed.
• amenity of nearby residents or Also of significance in relation to this
other sensitive land uses; or application is the Plans discussion
• character and appearance of the regarding small scale renewable
settlement or area in which it is and low carbon energy schemes.
located. The application includes for a range
121
of linked photovoltaic panels to be The AONB Design Guide accepts

sited on the south facing roof slope. that many buildings will be
It is understood that Conditions altered, extended or even
may be attached to any planning converted to a new use at some
approval. point during their life, and
that if carried out sensitively
Response to Design Guidance this can allow old buildings to
and how this has affected be adapted to meet changing
proposals needs while retaining their
character and meaning. The
2.1.17 The North Pennines AONB key characteristic of almost all
Building Design Guide 2011 successful extensions lies in the
respect shown to the original
This Design Guide was produced he ex
building so that the existing
under Spence and Dower’s guidance volume or massing
assing remains
rema the
to help promote new development
that conserves and enhances the
natural beauty of the North Pennines
while accommodating the needs of
EN
dominantt for
sting two store

The existing
form.
storey extension
nsitive to the
is not sensitive t local
its communities – and to stimulate ernacular and shows no respect
vernacular
IM
the highest standards of design, or understan
understanding of the original
conservation and development. building.
Below are some general comments
EC
from that Guidance which is Pr

Property in the past was
immediately relevant to this project.
roject. constantly being modified to suit
changing family size, economic
The need for guidance e does status or developing functional
not mean placing restrictions
SP
purpose. Much of the building

on development, innovative industry’s business today is
eas, but
design or new ideas, a continuation of this process
essen
actively promoting essential and much of the architectural
development that complements history of the AONB would be dull
the character of the landscape without it.
and helps stimulate economic
activity whilst increasing the There are several other issues
sustainability of communities. referred to in the Design Guide which
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
are relevant to this application and

AONBs are lived in, working which will be discussed further in the
landscapes whose character has design response:
been created and maintained
by human activity over the • Respecting local settlement
generations and where patterns and building forms,
sustaining their quality will incorporating local materials and
continue to depend on careful design detailing;
stewardship of the land and • Achieving harmony by
buildings. appropriate siting, massing,
122
scale, proportion, rhythm, English Heritage (now Historic

materials and landscaping; England) acknowledge that very few
• Natural materials used in farm buildings fall into a category
construction such as stone and where they are such architecturally
timber; significant elements of our heritage
that they should be conserved
• Coherence of structural form; with minimal or no intervention.
• Importance of chimneys; ‘If changes are planned so as
to preserve the buildings, their
• Subsidiary and subservient forms; features of interest and their setting,
• Addition of porches; then these buildings can go on to
tell the story of our past and present.’
• Colour;
• Letting in light; With any conversion
con or
ptation ther
adaptation there is a balance to
• The importance of mature
boundary walls;
• Fitting into the grain of
landscaping in terms of placing
EN be between incorporating
e struck betwee
the practical requirements and
protecting the special character
sign
and significance of the farm
and orientation. building.
build These potential
IM
co
conflicts require careful and
ditional
2.1.18 The Conversion of Traditional thoughtful design and often
Farm Buildings: A guide to good
oo innovative solutions need to be
EC
tage
practice by English Heritage found.
This document is a very useful Historic farm buildings invariably
primer in relation the
n to some of th retain key features that provide
issues we are e facing in this particular
SP
evidence of their former use and

project. It states
tates that farm
fa buildings contribute to their significance.
‘… representnt a major economic These features may simply be a
asset in terms of their
the capacity to series of ventilation slits formed
accommodate new uses’. in the masonry.
The concept of reuse is not a
new one. Farm buildings have
often been adapted over a
long period to accommodate
developing farming practices
and technologies.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`
123
2.2 Evaluation leading to the

Proposed Design
2.2.1 The new owners gave a clear
brief from the outset which produced
two alternative basic proposals
leading to further discussions and
reinforcement of the brief. They
wanted:
• To transform what they regard A.12

as being a dreadful two-storey
extension carried out circa 1960s,
with windows that are so low it is
difficult to see out without sitting
down;
• To refurbish and bring the original
stone building, with its south
facing windows, into a habitable
IM
state;
• Consideration of a new main
entrance which is visible on A.13
3
EC
approach – the existing main

13,
entrance, seen in Figure A.13,
nt) of
is on the south face (front)
essed by a
the house and is accessed
somewhat tortuous routeoute on foot
SP
from the drivewayay at the rea

rear of
the house;
uality living
• Simple but good quality
conditions with better access to
the south facing garden area;
A.14
• A very much more open-plan
living space throughout the
ground floor with a sitting space
retreat in the first floor original
loft farm store space – seen in
Figure A.14;
• To make the ground floor one level
for future ease of access (currently
there are steep steps down from
the main living space into the
ground floor of the extension,
seen in Figure A.15); A.15
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
124
• To take advantage of wonderful

views to the north and east
which are currently not visible
due to the height of the windows
in the kitchen area – seen in
Figure A.16;
• A first floor bathroom – the current
small bathroom is on the ground
floor and has no insulation as it is
single skin brickwork set into the
byre; A.16
• Access to a w.c. on the ground 2.2.3 The AONB Design Guide accepts
floor; the principlee that
th many buildings
• Reorganisation of bedrooms; will be altered, ex
extended or even
• Workshop space in the byre and
the coal store lean-to at the rear to
be kept;
EN point
erted to a new use at some
converted
oint during their
old buildin
se
th life, and that if
carried out sensitively this can allow
buildings to be adapted to meet
• Upgrading insulation throughout ut changi needs while retaining their
changing
IM
ng
and installation of energy saving character
char and meaning. The Guide
devices where possible. st
states that property in the past was
constantly being modified to suit
EC
2.2.2 The NPPF states that at changing family size, economic

appropriate expertise should be status or developing functional
used. Spence and Dower LLP are purpose.
architects who are well versed in what
is required too bring suc
such projects into
SP
2.2.4 The cumulative impact of

viable contemporary
emporary us use by using the large extension together with
nversion design ideas.
relevant conversion other small-scale changes has
As well as assisting
isting in writing and compromised both the original
illustrating the AONB Design Guide, building itself and its setting.
they were also awarded a 2012 RIBA The large extension is totally
Award for a farmstead conversion and incongruous and it is unlikely that
extension in Northumberland. The it would be allowed now under any
judges stated on giving the award, planning guidance justification.
‘The scheme makes four dwellings However, the substantial additional
out of an old farm and sets new accommodation exists. Removal of the
standards for the re-use of derelict extension would not be considered
agricultural buildings in the region … by the applicant as it provides,
The forms of the new buildings echo albeit in a current unsatisfactory
a modern industrial aesthetic and are manner, living space they require
robustly detailed.’ and it is basically structurally sound.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
125
(Additionally, if it were to be removed treatment which reflect this together

the exposed original building would with the remainder of the design
be substantially scarred.) Therefore approach. These are discussed
the argument is how to best mitigate below.
its impact.
Detailed thought processes
2.2.5 The skill here is to apply regarding the existing house
sympathetic alterations that do not
further diminish the historical context 3.1.4 The existing staircase is
but go on to tell a new story, which within the original farmhouse but
can be easily read as such. is itself fairly new, being replaced
by the previous owner. A first
2.2.6 A well designed building layout was produced showing
is not merely about the external the staircase remaining ning in its
appearance but it will combine existing position, n, but this proved
functionality (it must work for its
users), firmness (good quality
materials need to be used that will EN
functionality
ive to the resul
to be restrictive
ity of the rem
resulting
remainder of the
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
layout. It was decided that a new
last) and delight (will it look good and staircase e be include
included as part of the
provide stimulation to both users and edevelopment of the north side of
redevelopment
IM
those passing by). he building, allowing the original
the
large main room of the farmhouse to
2.2.7 The existing property is
be ‘open
‘opened up’.
supplied by spring water, has a
EC
septic tank and is supplied by mains

electricity.
3 The Final Layout and

SP
his Application
Appearance of this Applica
3.1.1 The process of consolidating
onsoli
the brief has been discussed above
and what is now being proposed is a
result of the careful two-way process
with the owners regarding design
gestation.
3.1.2 The discussion in this section

is to be read with the accompanying
proposals drawings showing plans,
sections and elevations.
3.1.3 The internal layout has been

through various iterations to reflect
the owners’ requirements, resulting
in the final layout and elevational A.17
126
A.20: View of house from driveway

--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
A.18, A.19: Driveway approach

IM
3.1.5 This dwelling is not conducive
ducive
to owners who wish to make th this a
EC
‘lifetime’ home. The circuitous

uitous route A.21: Possibility for easily visible new entrance
to the main entrance from the main in junction between original stone building and
rendered extension
drive, around the east gable of ththe
farmhouse, and then down ste steps,
SP
is not readilyy accessib

accessible – and in
winter can be positively dangerous.
Additionally,
y, the flat roofed
extension is setet three
thr steps down
from the original building and any
restructuring of the extension needs
to create level access throughout the
ground floor area.
3.1.6 The brief suggested that a

new entrance, clearly visible from
the driveway approach, should be
considered. The detailed design
studies logically included a new A.22, A.23
staircase access to the first floor
alongside a new main entrance. This 3.1.7 There are very few original
also provided an easier landing link features left within the house. For
into the converted loft at first floor example, internal doors are cheap
level. flush doors.
127
3.1.8 All windows and external What to do with the prominent,

doors have been changed and ugly, rendered flat roof
are unsympathetic to the original extension? A sort of Design
farmhouse. The approach to Review!
window design throughout needs
consolidation. 3.1.10 At the stage where initial
ideas had been drawn up for
3.1.9 The existing main entrance is further discussion with the client,
an ill-conceived lobby on the south the architect for the project, Tina
elevation which is not functional Gough, had been asked to make
other than as a wind-break when a presentation to an all-day RTPI
entering the house. conference ‘Heritage Matters – from
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
EN Alll can easily be put right

south elevation:
elevation
• Wrong windows
wind
ri on the
• Added porch with out-of-keeping

roof
roo (slope too low and wrong
IM
materials)
• Asbestos roofs elsewhere
EC
SP
A.24
There is so much that is jarring with

the 1960s extension:
• Height in relation to the original
(would such an overpowering
two storey extension be allowed
today?)
• Flat roof
• Poor off-the-peg fenestration
• Incongruent render
• Wall junction continuous
with the original stonework
(rather than being set back)
A.25
128
Policy to Practice’. Her interactive undulating and whose stability is

lecture was ‘Design Matters: an unknown quantity. It might also
Understanding and Responding to be bedrock. There was too much
Character’. As part of this it seemed uncertainty with likely expense
appropriate to present the problems given the unknowns, and therefore
entailed in improving the appearance it was agreed that cladding and
of this dwelling, asking how the reshaping the existing, given that it is
delegates might respond in the same reasonably well constructed, was the
situation, with particular reference to approach to be taken. This is also the
using the AONB Design Guide. more sustainable approach – re-using
the existing reduces the carbon
3.1.11 We had looked at the
footprint and there is also less risk of
possibility of demolition and starting
ta damage.
environmental
again, but that would be expensive
and leave scars on the original 3.1.12 The lecture presented these
fabric whose extent cannot be fully
anticipated. The owners wished to
have at least the same amount of
floor area that they had purchased,
EN first three dimensio
(Figures
3.1.13 These
dimensional thoughts
and A.27).
igures A.26 a
The images helped to raise

and creating a new, more subservientent a discussion
discu regarding how this
IM
extension to achieve that would appr
approach complies with or breaks the
encroach on to land which is very ru
rules of design guidance.
EC
The ‘shadow’
of the original
SP
rendered building
laid on top of
• Adding a subservient
bservient pitched
p the possible
roof proposed
alterations,
• Creating a better junction shown below
with the original farmhouse
• Reconfiguring windows to suit
a raised ground floor level
and take advantage of views
A.26: View from the public highway
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
129
The ‘shadow’
of the original
rendered building
laid on top of
• Introduction of a ‘fly’ wall to the possible
help break down the massing proposed
alterations,
• Creating a new main entrance shown below
with staircase
A.27: View on approach to a new north-facing entrance

EN
IM
• Most built development in the original
origina house should remain the
North Pennines is found within dominant
dom form. The original fails
EC
the more fertile and sheltered on

o all fronts. The reaction from the
dale and valley landscapess – audience indicated that, whilst
prominent locations are usually the volume of the alterations are
avoided. This extension on in its
it actually increased, the overall
elevated position is just
ust abo
about impact is far more subservient and
SP
as prominent as it could be. respectful of the original.

--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Whatever is done e to this ext

extension
its prominence will always
alway be • It is normally suggested that the
secure. A bold statement is junction of an extension with
therefore felt to be appropriate. the original is set back from the
original to clearly define the two.
• It is recommended that new In this instance the extension has
buildings are integrated and been built to crudely align with
anchored into the landscape. the original farmhouse gable.
Well this certainly sits into its local If the render is to be clad with
undulating landscape. new material then this is not
• It is accepted that forms of possible and the junction will
extensions in the AONB are many become more pronounced. To
and varied, occurring over a long positively mask the junction we
time span. The key characteristic have introduced a new vertical
of most successful extensions stone wall aligning with, and
lies in the respect shown to the being an extension to, the existing
original building – the existing dry-stone walling – thus also
volume and massing of the helping to embed the extension
130
with the harsh but visually the precedent for traditional use of
stunning landscape. (This is then corrugated material both for roofs
mirrored in the stone ‘fly’ wall on and walls in farm buildings, including
the new gable.) junctions with slate roofs.
3.1.14 A discussion was also opened 3.1.15 In relation to design guidance,
on the appropriateness of materials the following applies:
which could be used. A comment was
made that the existing render was too • Regarding materials and colour,
close in colour to the original stone, guidance recommends materials
and therefore it is totally appropriate that will weather well (fibre
to clad the extension with another cement cladding will), marry
material. It was also stated that stone with existing materials (see
to match would be inappropriate as illustrations
on above), and do not
this would not allow the farmhouse rsh ccontrasts (there will
strike harsh
to shine as being the obvious historic certainly distinctive contrast
rtainly be a d
building. The sketches clearly show
the cladding as being of a very
distinct colour contrast. It was stated
EN and we arg
argue that this will not
be harsh du
co
due to the precedence
set by corrugated
elsewhere).
elsew
materials
that the intention was to insulate thee
IM
walls and then clad with fibre cementent • Timber,
T although readily
corrugated sheet. The illustrations
tions available, is not often used
in Figure A.28 were presented d to traditionally as an external
C
indicate the material in use and also cladding material in the area.
PE
A.28
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
131
• Design guidance states that asbestos and plastic coated

manmade materials should not metal and provides an acceptable
be precluded nor should the alternative for farm buildings.
possibility of punctuation with
bright colours be denied. 3.1.16 The following images were
also presented and these, with a
• Also noted is that widespread few minor amendments, are what
production of farm sheds in is submitted on the application
standardised materials have elevation drawings.
come to be part of the farming
landscape. Modern fibre-cement The final comments received from
profiled sheeting has superseded delegates were very positive.
A.29: View from the public highway

SP
travelling south
A.30: View from the public highway,

up to the farmhouse gable
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
132
E A 3 View in passing travelling

A.31:
north
n
IM
C
A.32: New entrance area at the top of the drive
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
133
Porches, windows and roof roof are now being replaced by solar
materials panels further down the roof, inset
into new slates, and aligning with the
3.1.17 Porches are not traditional windows below.)
features in the AONB. Design
3.1.20 No new window openings will
guidance states that getting the scale
be created in the original farmhouse
right with the addition of porches is
and windows will be replaced with
frequently difficult, and many porches
sliding sashes.
become sun rooms, making them
prominent on the front of the house. 3.1.21 New windows in the newly
clad extension will be formed which
3.1.18 However, in this instance are clearly different from the original
the porch already exists and is the very
building to distinguish
visually does not sit well alongside new aesthetic from the he ttraditional.
the original mono-pitched coal mple sculptu
They will be simple sculptural holes
house. It is proposed that a more
coherent integration of the two is
built (see also Figure A.30, which
indicates that when viewed from the
EN
punched into to the fabric.
fabri However, the
ndows are of the same size
vertical windows
ine through with
as and line
sh windows. Th
sash
w the existing
The proportion of solid
IM
road this elevated elevation is not to
o void and the arrangement of the
clearly seen). components form a coherent visual
balance.
lance New windows will provide
lso
3.1.19 The sketch in Figure A.33 also
EC
neww views
v and much more daylight
shows the ‘blind’ windows of the e lo
loft
into the building.
area opened to give south viewsws and
sun gain. (Note that the roof
oof windows 3.1.22 Windows will be dark grey
shown under the ridge off the ma
main aluminium.
SP
A.33
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
134
3.1.23 The main roof of the construction has proved remarkably

farmhouse will be slate (to match adaptable and robust and reflects
nearby buildings). However, all other the value of sustainability. The way
roof pitches, including the coal house we maintain, alter, extend or convert
roof, are not steep enough for slates existing buildings is fundamentally
and will be clad in the same fibre a sustainable process in which the
cement sheeting as the walls, in order land, building structure and existing
that another surface material does materials are likely to be reused, thus
not have to be introduced. The palette reducing the volume of new resources
remains simple with stone, slate and to be consumed and the volume of
fibre cement. waste material for disposal.
3.1.24 The north facing roof over the 4.3 The introduction of better
converted loft is used to discreetly insulation, day lighting and natural
provide more light into this tucked ventilation, together with PV panels,
ion, togeth
away space, rather than punching
more windows into the original
elevation. An overabundance of
several rooflights dotted onto roofs
EN will produce a low energy
with
ith reduced e
whilst still ac
internal
e building
environmental impacts,
achieving comfortable
nternal conditions
co for applicants who
IM
is not recommended. The rooflights ts will be making this their long-term
will be linked to create a more honest
est home.
hom
continuous source of light – an
industrial approach often used by
EC
farmers in their agricultural

tural sheds.
3.1.25 Additionally,ly, all the ventilation

venti
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
slits will be retained glazed.
ined and glaze
SP
(Note that newew long slslits in the

extension living
iving space and on the
stair have the
he same proportions as
these slits.)
4 Sustainable building
4.1 The overall plan for this A.34: Proposed type of PV panels inset into the
development will be one of newly slated roof
sustainability. The applicants
are keen that all aspects of the 4.4 The Allendale Neighbourhood
conversion will consider the impact Development Plan encourages
on the environment. energy generating infrastructure
using renewable or low carbon
4.2 The proposed reuse of this energy sources to serve individual
building, and its extension, is a properties in countryside locations.
continuation of our ancestors’ Photovoltaic panels are included in
deep-rooted sustainable way this application sited on the south
of living. Traditional building facing roof slope of the farmhouse,
135
visually integrated with the roof slates agricultural setting in design and
and windows below. Visual mitigation materials.
to their siting is inherent given that
the building is set high above the 6.2 The interesting original historic
road. building will be conserved and
improved by giving it fresh life with
4.5 A bat and barn owl report is also honest interventions to ensure its
attached to the application. This long-term future. The footprint of
concludes that the predicted scale the dwelling is not unduly extended.
of impact of this work on bats on this The existing detrimental visual
site will be minimal. We will ensure alterations – amongst which are
all suggested mitigation within that poor windows, asbestos and other
report will be carried. inappropriate roofs, a porch which is
out-of-keeping, and the ugly 1960s
5 Access extension – will all be repl
replaced or
5.1 Whilst it is admittedly not all easy
surrounding terrain to negotiate for
people with disabilities, the design
EN
modified to create
reate a new home
ho more
fitting to itss prominent location within
the AONB.
NB.
of the property will enable access 6.3 Throughout this
th process the
IM
by those with disabilities. Access by design’s dev
development has been
vehicle will be easy and a discrete informed byb understanding of the
smooth path from car to entrance established
ablis design language of
EC
will be provided, with a wheelchairair this

is part
p of the AONB together with
accessible threshold to gain newew general
gen Northumberland vernacular.
g.
main entry into the building. It is considered that the resulting
proposals are appropriate in context.
ropose as
5.2 The ground floor is proposed
SP
t. However, tthe
an open plan layout.
ground floor would be adaptab
adaptable to
provide an accessible bedro
bedroom in the
future, and the ground floor shower
room would sit alongside this space
or could become an en-suite area.
6 Conclusions
6.1 The proposal will respect,
preserve and enhance the character
of the AONB. It will allow landscape
to continue to dominate the setting
– and will better grow out of the
landscape. The proposal is strongly
related in massing and scale to
the original property and to its
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`
136
Appendix B
RIBA Plan of Work 2020
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

The RIBA Plan of Work

organises the process of
briefing, designing, delivering,
maintaining, operating and
0 1 2
using a building into eight
stages. It is a framework for
all disciplines on construction
RIBA projects and should be Strategic Preparation Concept
used solely as guidance for Definition and Briefing Design
Plan of Work the preparation of detailed
professional services and
2020 building contracts. Projects span from Stage 1 to Stage 6; the
Stage Boundaries: Stage Outcome The best means of achieving Project Brief approved by the Architectural Concept
Stages 0-4 will generally at the end of the stage the Client Requirements client and confirmed that it approved by the client and
be undertaken one after confirmed can be accommodated on aligned to the Project Brief
the other. the site
If the outcome determines that The brief remains “live” during
Stages 4 and 5 will overlap a building is the best means of Stage 2 and is derogated in
in the Project Programme achieving the Client Requirements, response to the Architectural
the client proceeds to Stage 1 Concept
for most projects.
Stage 5 commences
when the contractor takes Core Tasks Prepare Client Requirements Prepare
are Project
Pr Brief Prepare Architectural
possession of the site during the stage includingg Proj
Project Outcomes Concept incorporating
Develop Business Case for
and finishes at Practical Sustainability Outcomes,
and Sustainabilit Strategic Engineering
feasible options including
Completion.
Stage 6 starts with the
handover of the building to
the client immediately after
Practical Completion and Project Strategies might include:
Project Budget
EN
review of Project Risks and
ments
Client Requirements
d
st delivers
Ratify option that best
Aspirations and
Quality Aspiration
patial Requirements
Spatial
Undertake Feasibility Studies
gree P
Agree Project Budget
requirements and aligned to
Cost Plan, Project Strategies
and Outline Specification
Agree Project Brief
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Derogations
finishes at the end of the – Conservation (if applicable)
– Cost Review Feedbackk from Sou
Source Site Information
Defects Liability Period. Undertake Design Reviews
– Fire Safety previouss projects
pro including Site Surveys
with client and Project
IM
Stage 7 starts concurrently – Health and Safety
– Inclusive Design Undertake
dertake Site Appraisa
Appraisals Prepare Project Programme Stakeholders
with Stage 6 and lasts for – Planning
the life of the building. – Plan for Use Prepare Project Execution Prepare stage Design
– Procurement Plan Programme
– Sustainability
Planning Note: See RIBA Plan of Work 2020 No design
gn team required
req for Stages 0 and 1. Client advisers may be appointed
Overview for detailed guidancee to the client
ient team to provide strategic advice and design thinking before Stage
EC
Planning Applications on Project Strategies 2 commences.

menc
are generally submitted
at the end of Stage 3 and
Core Statutory
tuto Strategic
St t appraisal of Source pre-application Obtain pre-application
should only be submitted
earlier when the threshold Processes
se Planning considerations
P Planning Advice Planning Advice
of information required has during
ng the stage:
stag Initiate collation of health Agree route to Building
been met. If a Planning and safety Pre-construction Regulations compliance
Application is made Planning
anning Information
SP
during Stage 3, a mid- Option: submit outline

Regulations
Building Re
stage gateway should be Planning Application
Health and Safety
Sa (CDM)
determined and it should
m
be clear to the project team
which tasks and deliverables
will be required.
See Overview guidance. Procurement Traditional
Route
Procurement: Design & Build 1 Stage
The RIBA Plan of Work Appoint Appoint
is procurement neutral – Design & Build 2 Stage client team design team ER
See Overview guidance for Management Contract Appoint
a detailed description of Construction Management contractor
how each stage might be
adjusted to accommodate Contractor-led ER
the requirements of the
Procurement Strategy. Information Client Requirements Project Brief Project Brief Derogations
ER
Employer’s Exchanges Business Case Feasibility Studies Signed off Stage Report
Requirements at the end of the stage
Site Information Project Strategies
Contractor’s
CP
Proposals Project Budget Outline Specification
Project Programme Cost Plan
Procurement Strategy
Responsibility Matrix
Information Requirements
Core RIBA Plan of Work terms are defined in the RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Overview glossary and set in Bold Type.
138
Appendix B:
RIBA Plan of Work 2020
3 4 5 6 7
Spatial Technical Manufacturing

Coordination Design and Construction Handover Use
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
outcome of Stage 0 may be the decision to initiate a project and Stage 7 covers the ongoing use of the building.
Architectural and engineering All design information Manufacturing, construction Building handed over, Building used, operated and
information Spatially required to manufacture and Commissioning Aftercare initiated and maintained efficiently
Coordinated and construct the project completed Building Contract concluded
completed
There is no design work in Stage 5 Stage 7 starts concurrently with
Stage 4 will overlap with Stage 5 other than responding to Site Stage 6 and lasts for the life of the
on most projects Queries building
Undertake Design Studies, Develop architectural and Finalise Site Logistics Hand over building in line with Implement Facilities
Engineering Analysis and engineering technical design Plan for Use Strategy Management and
Manufacture Building
Cost Exercises to test Asset
Ass Management
Prepare and coordinate Systems and construct Undertake review of Project
Architectural Concept
resulting in Spatially
Coordinated design aligned
to updated Cost Plan, Project
Strategies and Outline
Specification
Initiate Change Control
EN
design team Building
Systems information
Prepare and integrate
specialist subcontractor
Building Systems
information
building
Monitor progress against
Construction Programme
Inspect Construction Quality
Resolve Site Queries as
Performancee
Undertake
ke seasonal
issioning
Commissioning
ctify defects
Rectify
mplete initial Aftercare
Complete After
Undertake
Unde Post Occupancy
Evaluation of building
performance in use
Verify Project Outcomes
including Sustainability
Outcomes
required tasks including lilight touch
IM
Procedures Prepare stage Design
Occupancy Evaluation
Post Occupanc
Programme Undertake Commissioning
onin
Prepare stage Design of building
Programme
ding Manu
Prepare Building Manual
Specialist subcontractor designs Adaptation of a building (at the
are prepared and reviewed during Building handover
over tasks bridge Stages
Stag 5 and 6 as set out in the Plan for Use end of its useful life) triggers a new
EC
Stage 4 egy
Strategy Stage 0
Review design against Submit Building Regulations Carry out Construction Comply with Planning Comply with Planning
Building Regulations Application Phase Plan Conditions as required Conditions as required
Prepare and submit Discharge pre- Comply with Planning
Pla
Planning Application anning
commencement Planning Conditions related
re to
Conditions cconstruction
SP
struction
Prepare Construction
Phase Plan
See Planning Note for guidance on
submitting a Planning Application Submit formm F10 to HSE if
earlier than at end of Stage 3
applicable
Appoint
Tender contractor
Appoint
ER CP contractor
Appoint Appoint Facilities Management

Pre-contract services agreement CP contractor and Asset Management teams, and
strategic advisers as needed
Appoint
Preferred bidder CP contractor
Signed off Stage Report Manufacturing Information Building Manual including Feedback on Project Feedback from Post
Health and Safety File and Performance Occupancy Evaluation
Project Strategies Construction Information
Fire Safety Information
Final Certificate Updated Building Manual
Updated Outline Final Specifications
Practical Completion including Health and
Specification Feedback from light touch
Residual Project Strategies certificate including Safety File and Fire Safety
Post Occupancy Evaluation
Updated Cost Plan Defects List Information as necessary
Building Regulations
Planning Application Application Asset Information
If Verified Construction
Information is required, verification
tasks must be defined
Further guidance and detailed stage descriptions are included in the RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Overview. © RIBA 2020
139
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

GLOSSARY
Article 4 direction – A legal instrument which Local planning authority (LPA) – A local authority
removes some or all permitted development or other body, such as a development
rights for a defined area. Each direction will be corporation, which has planning powers
specific to this area and the particular rights in respect of plan-making and/or the
removed. determination of planning applications within
Article 5 direction – A legal instrument paralleling its defined geographic area.
Article 4 directions but only applicable to Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
conservation areas. Government (MHCLG) – The government
Certificate of Lawful Development of Proposed department which currently has responsibility
Works – A certificate that can be applied for for planning.
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
which, if granted, will provide legal proof National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
that the development to which it relates – The government document which defines
has planning consent through permitted the primary elements of current government
development rights. planning policy for England. There are different,
Commission for Architecture and the Built but broadly equivalent, policy documents for
Environment (CABE) – The New Labour the devolved administrations.
Government’s design adviser. National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – – An online sister
sist publication to the NPPF
A mechanism designed to provide collective which giveses guidance
guida
uida on interpretation and
funding for infrastructure needed by the application
tion of government
ation govern planning policy as
wider community through a levy on individual
developments.
Department for Digital, Culture, Media and
Sport (DCMS) – The government department
currently responsible for the determination
EN set out
ut in the NPPF.
Permitted development (PD) – Development that
mitted developm
developmen
planning cons
detail.
not require an application for
generally does no
consent. See the GPDO entry for more
conse
of applications for scheduled monument lanning Inspectorate

Planning In – A government agency
IM
consent. which handles inquiry and appeal processes in
Design and Access Statement – A submission
ssion
sio planning.
pla
requirement for planning applications
ons
ns in some Planning performance agreement – A formal
Pla
defined areas. bilateral agreement between an applicant
EC
Design Council CABE – Part of the

e Design Council
he and an LPA under which, in return for a fee
which focuses on the built environment – and subject to agreed action by the applicant,
a successor to CABE following
owing dissolution by
wing its dissolu
dissolutio the LPA agrees to defined timescales for the
the coalition Government.
ment.
ent. progression of an application.
Development Plan Scheme
cheme (DPS) – The document
heme (DP Planning Portal – A government website which
produced by each ch LPA setting out the
PA settin t suite of provides a route for online submission of
SP
documents relating development plan

elating to the devel planning applications and offers wide-ranging
which it will
ill produce and the timetable for their information about planning policy and
production. procedures.
Environmental Impact
pact Assessment
mpact Ass (EIA) – Prior approval – A requirement attached to
A requirement to establish
est the potential impact certain types of development with permitted
of a development on a particular area that development rights. It allows LPAs to require
attaches to many major developments. planning applications if they consider that
the potential impact of the proposal justifies
General Permitted Development Order (GPDO) this.
– The Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) (England) Order Scheduled monument – Typically, upstanding or
2015 – the legal instrument which sets out in below ground archaeology of a relatively high
detail the definition of what development is level of sensitivity.
‘permitted’ and therefore generally does not Scheduled monument consent (SMC) – The
require applications for planning consent. specific planning consent regime related
Permitted development is not covered in to scheduled monuments under which
the NPPG, so it is important to check on applications for consent are made to DCMS.
the Planning Portal for current information Section 106 Agreement – An agreement by which
regarding permitted development rights. an applicant agrees to do or not do particular
Listed building – A building formally included things, including making payments and
on the statutory List of Buildings of Special providing certain types of accommodation etc.,
Architectural or Historic Interest. in association with the granting of planning
Listed building consent – The specific additional permission.
planning-related consent needed for works to Site of Local Conservation Importance (SLCI) –
or affecting a listed building. A nature conservation land designation.
141
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) – An detail on how local plan policies will be applied
environmental conservation land designation in relation to a particular topic or area, not to
offering a high degree of protection. add new policy coverage.
Strategic Industrial Land (SIL) – Land which is Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order
designated as being of particular importance in 1987 (as amended) – The legal instrument
the retention of opportunities for industry and which defines, classifies and groups various
industrial employment. uses and defines which changes between
Supplementary planning document (SPD) – use classes constitute development requiring
A planning document forming part of an LPA’s planning consent.
suite of documents. Designed to give more
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
142
ENDNOTES
CHAPTER 1 Available at https://www.newcastle.gov.

uk/sites/default/files/2018-12/planning_
1 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
officerdelegation.pdf [23 March 2020].
Government, 2019, National Planning Policy
Framework, paragraph 47. 3 Ministry of Housing, Communities and
Local Government, 2019, Guidance: Before
2 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
submitting an application. Available at
Government, 2019, National Design Guide,
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/before-
paragraphs 163–168.
submitting-an-application#the-value-of-pre-
application-engagement [23 March 2020].
CHAPTER 2 4 Ministry of Housing, Communities and
Local Government, 2018, Guidance: Making
1 See https://www.planningportal.co.uk/. an application. Available at https://www.
2 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local gov.uk/guidance/making-an-application
Government, 2019, Permitted development [23 March 2020].
rights for householders: Technical 5 Commission for Architecture and the Built
guidance. Available at https://www.gov. Environment (CABE), 2006, Design and
uk/government/publications/permitted- Access Statements: How to write, read
development-rights-for-householders- em
m Available at https://www.
and use them.
technical-guidance [20 March 2020]. ouncil.o
ncil.o
designcouncil.org.uk/resources/guide/
3 Department for Communities and Local n-and-access
design-and-access-statements-how-write-
Government, Party Wall etc. Act 1996: d-and-use-them [[1 April 2020].
read-and-use-them
4
Explanatory booklet, May 2016.
Party walls and building work. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/party-walls-building-
works/work-tell-your-neighbour-about
[20 March 2020].
EN 6 Mini tryy of Ho
Minis
Ministry
Government, 2
environment
uk/guidanc
Housing
Housing, Communities and Local
201
2019, Guidance: Historic
A
environment. Available at https://www.gov.
uk/guidance/conserving-and-enhancing-the-
historic-
historic-e
historic-environment [23 March 2020].
IM
5 See https://historicengland.org.uk/. 7 Birkb
rkb
Birkbeck D and Kruczkowski S, 2015, Building
6 Planning Portal, 2020, Consent types. fo Life 12: The sign of a good place to live.
for
gportal
gportal.
Available at: https://www.planningportal. Available at: https://www.designcouncil.
s/60/
/60
co.uk/info/200126/applications/60/ org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/
0].
consent_types [20 March 2020]. Building%20for%20Life%2012_0.pdf
EC
[6 May 2020].
7 munities and Local
Ministry of Housing, Communities
mission in principle.
Government, 2019, Permission principle 8 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
www.gov.uk/guid
www.gov.uk/guidan
Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ Government, 2019, National Planning Policy
nciple
ciple [20 March 20
permission-in-principle 2020]. Framework. Available at https://assets.
publishing.service.gov.uk/government/
8 ttps://www.gov.uk/
ps://www.gov.uk/
Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/
SP
mission-requ
mission-required#d
when-is-permission-required#do-i-need-to- file/810197/NPPF_Feb_2019_revised.pdf
planning-permis
planning-permissio
apply-for-planning-permission-to-demolish-a- [23 March 2020].
-or-structure
or-structure [20 March
building-or-structure M 2020].
9 t: https://ww
Available at: ttps://w
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/
ission-
when-is-permission-required#demolition-in- CHAPTER 5
a-conservation-arear [20 March 2020]. 1 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
10 Planning Portal, 2020, Prior approval, Government, 2018, Guidance: Making an
Demolition of buildings. Available at: https:// application. Available at: https://www.
ecab.planningportal.co.uk/uploads/1app/ gov.uk/guidance/making-an-application
guidance/guidance_note-prior_approval_ [23 March 2020].
demolition.pdf [20 March 2020]. 2 Planning Portal, 2020, Consent types.
11 Planning Portal, 2020, The decision- Available at: https://www.planningportal.
making process. Available at: https:// co.uk/info/200126/applications/60/
www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200232/ consent_types [23 March 2020].
planning_applications/58/the_decision- 3 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
making_process/6 [20 March 2020]. Government, 2019, National Planning Policy
Framework, paragraph 44.
4 Based on Planning Portal, 2020, What
CHAPTER 3
to submit. Available at: https://www.
1 RIBA, RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Overview, p 34. planningportal.co.uk/info/200232/
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Available at: https://www.architecture.com/ planning_applications/59/how_to_apply/6

knowledge-and-resources/resources-landing- [20 March 2020].
page/riba-plan-of-work [1 April 2020]. 5 Town and Country Planning (Section 62A
2 Newcastle City Council, 2011, The Newcastle Applications) (Amendment) Regulations
Charter 2011, ‘Planning officer delegation’. 2016, Section 3.
143
6 European Union, 2017, Environmental Impact Building-Design-Guide.pdf [6 May 2020].

Assessment of Projects: Guidance on the 4 The guidance relevant at the time of writing
preparation of the Environmental Impact the Statement has been updated and
Assessment Report (Directive 2011/92/EU replaced by Historic England’s Adapting
as amended by 2014/52/EU), p 10. Traditional Farm Buildings: Best practice
7 London Borough of Hammersmith guidelines for adaptive use, 2017. Available
and Fulham, 2020, Making a planning at: https://historicengland.org.uk/images-
application. Available at: https:// books/publications/adapting-traditional-
www.lbhf.gov.uk/planning/planning- farm-buildings/heag158-adapting-
applications/making-planning-application traditional-farm-buildings/ [6 May 2020].
[23 March 2020].
8 Ibid.
CHAPTER 7
9 London Borough of Hammersmith
and Fulham, 2020, Local validation 1 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
checklist. Available at: https://www. Government, 2019, National Planning Policy
lbhf.gov.uk/sites/default/files/section_ Framework, paragraphs 54 and 55.
attachments/validation_checklist_ 2 Ministry of Housing, Communities and
major_applications_10.04.2018.pdf Local Government, 2019,
019,
19, Guidance: Use of
[20 March 2020]. planning conditions.
ns. Availa
Available
vaila at:
10 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local https://www.gov.uk/guidance/use-of-
v.uk/guidance
.uk/guidance
Government, 2018, Guidance: Making an
application. Available at: https://www.
gov.uk/guidance/making-an-application
[23 March 2020].
11 Ministry of Housing, Communities and
3
4
5
EN
planning-conditions
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ministry
nistry
ditions [23 March 2020].
ry of Housing, C
Government, 2019
Communities and Local
2019, National Planning Policy
Local Government, 2019, Guidance: Use of
IM
planning conditions. Available at: Framework,, para
Framework paragraph 183.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/use-of- 6 Ibid., paragraph
Ibid., paragra 182.
paragr
planning-conditions [20 March 2020].
12 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local al
Government, 2019, Guidance: Determining ing a CHAPTER
PT 8
EC
planning application. Available at: 1 M

Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
ermining-
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/determining- Government, 2019, National Planning Policy
a-planning-application [23 Marchh 2020]. Framework, paragraphs 34 and 56.
nities and
13 Ministry of Housing, Communities 2 Ibid., paragraph 57.
uidance:
Local Government, 2014, Guidance:
3 Old Oak and Park Royal Development
SP
cations, Whe
Fees for planning applications, When are
applications eligible for a ‘free go’.
go’. Avail
A
Available Corporation Planning Committee, 2017,
ublishing.service.
blishing.service.
at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov. First Central report. Available at: https://
ads/system/
ads/system/u
uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/ www.london.gov.uk/moderngovopdc/
74500/W
4500/W
attachment_data/file/574500/When_are_ documents/s57378/First_Central_Report.pdf
a
applications_eligible_for_a__free_go_.pdf [3 April 2020].
[20 March 2020].
CHAPTER 9
CHAPTER 6 1 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
1 Commission for Architecture and the Built Government, 2020, Guidance: Appeals.
Environment, 2006, Design Statements: How Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/
to write, read and use them. Available at: appeals#planning-appeals--general
https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/ [23 March 2020].
default/files/asset/document/design-and- 2 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
access-statements.pdf [23 March 2020]. Government, 2020, Guidance: Appeals:
2 Planning Portal, 2020, What is a Design how long they take. Available at: https://
and Access Statement? Available at: https:// www.gov.uk/guidance/appeals-average-
www.planningportal.co.uk/faqs/faq/51/ timescales-for-arranging-inquiries-and-
what_is_a_design_and_access_statement hearings [23 March 2020].
[23 March 2020]. 3 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
3 North Pennines AONB Building Design Government, 2019, Guidance: Enforcement
Guide, 2011. Available at: https://www. and post-permission matters. Available at:
northpennines.org.uk/wp-content/ https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ensuring-
uploads/2019/11/North-Pennines-AONB- effective-enforcement [6 May 2020].
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
144
INDEX
Page numbers in bold indicate glossary terms. construction method statements 42

consultation
Access Statements see Design and Access neighbour 28
Statements pre-application 19, 21, 22, 24, 29–30, 69,
affordable housing provision 88, 90, 91, 94 77–78
agent of change principle 83–84 public 55, 105–110
agricultural holdings certificates 49 contracts 103
anticipatory planning 82, 83–84 councillors 24, 26
appeals 76, 80, 95–96, 97–102
enforcement action 96, 103–104 deemed discharge procedures 57, 80–81
hearings 98–99, 100, 102 delegated powers 24–26
householder appeals 99, 100 demolition 16–17
inquiries 99, 100, 101, 102 Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport
specialist support 102 (DCMS) 12, 141
timescales 96, 99–100, 101 Design and Access Statements 32–34, 49,
written representations 98, 100, 102 65–66, 141
applications and consents 45–63 Design Statement principles 40–42, 66–74
amendments 60 example combined Heritage, Design and
delegated powers 24–26 Accesss Statement
S 66, 69, 70–73,
expiry of consents 60–62 113–136
–13636
‘free go’ provisions 59–60 input to submissions 101–102
o appeal sub
hearings 27–28 Design Council 35, 141
hybrid applications 46–47, 56–58
listed building consent 12, 13, 49, 141
outline applications 48, 55–58, 60–61, 77
permission in principle (PIP) consent 14–15
planning guarantees 59
EN design
gn review 34
designated
esignated
34–36
signated heritage a
development, defined
defin
assets 33–34
8–9
development contributions
con
co 87–94
affordable housing provision 88, 90, 91, 94
pre-commencement conditions 58–59, 78 Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) 62, 87,
Comm
Commu
IM
referral to committee 24, 27–28 88, 89–90, 141
renewals 61–62 Section 106 Agreements 87, 89, 90–94, 141
Se
reserved matters 57–58, 60, 77, 80 0 Development
De
Dev Plan Schemes (DPS) 4, 107, 141
scheduled monument consent (SMC) MC) 12, 141
SMC) 41 discharge
d of conditions 57, 78–80
timescales for determination 59, 95
EC
validation requirements 46, 6, 47–55, 108 early assessment triangle 31, 39, 40, 68, 69
see also conditions; development
elopment ecological surveys 48, 79
contributions enforcement action 95, 96, 97, 102–104
Areas of Outstanding Natural (AONB) 10
atural Beauty (AON
(AONB environmental health legislation 81–82, 83
Article 4 directions 10,
0, 141
1 Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) 50, 79,
Article 5 directionss 10,
0 141 95, 141
SP
environmental surveys 48, 79

bat surveys 48,
8, 79
7 expiry of consents 60–62
Brownfield Land
d Registers 14
nd
fees 13, 35, 59, 79–80
Certificates of Lawful Development of Proposed
ful De
Dev financial contributions see development
Works 11, 15, 141 contributions
character statements 4–5, 68–69 flood risk zones 24
climate emergency 21–22 ‘free go’ provisions 59–60
commencement of development 61, 62
Commission for Architecture and the Built General Permitted Development Orders (GPDOs)
Environment (CABE) 33, 65, 68, 141 8, 10, 16–17, 80, 141
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) 62, 87, 88,
89–90, 141 hearings
community organisations 28 appeals 98–99, 100, 102
conditions 57, 75–85 applications 27–28
construction 81–82 heritage assets 33–34, 66
deemed discharge procedures 57, 80–81 Heritage Statements 33–34, 54, 66
discharge of 57, 78–80 example combined Heritage, Design and Access
operation 82–84 Statement 66, 69, 70–73, 113–136
pre-commencement 58–59, 78 Historic England 12
reasons for 76–77 householder appeals 99, 100
see also development contributions hybrid applications 46–47, 56–58
conditions tracker spreadsheets 79
consents see applications and consents informal hearings 98–99, 100, 102
conservation areas 10, 16, 34, 49, 54, 68–69 infrastructure improvements see development
construction conditions 81–82 contributions
145
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

inquiries 99, 100, 101, 102 project inception 20–21, 39–42

protected wreck sites 33
listed building consent 12, 13, 49, 141 public consultation 55, 105–110
listed buildings 15, 17, 33, 54, 97, 141
local development plans 1–2, 4, 23, 24, 69, referral of applications to committee 24, 27–28
107–108 refunds 59, 79–80
local planning authorities (LPAs) 141 registered battlefields 33
local press 28–29 registered parks and gardens 33
location plans 48–49 renewals 61–62
reserved matters 57–58, 60, 77, 80
major developments, defined 49–50 RIBA 21, 103, 106, 107, 111
material amendments 60 RIBA Plan of Work 2020 20, 30, 39, 45, 75, 87,
material change of use 9–10 137–139
material operation 61
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local scheduled monument consent (SMC) 12, 141
Government (MHCLG) 96, 141 scheduled monuments 17, 33, 97, 141
minor amendments 60 schemes of delegation 24–26
Section 106 Agreements 87, 89, 90–94, 141
National Design Guide 4, 69 site assessment 31, 40, 41, 1, 42
National Model Design Code 4, 69 site plans 48–49
national parks 10 Sites of Local Conservation Importance (SLCIs)
vation Import
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2, 24, 141
3–4, 21, 23, 29, 34–35, 48, 54–55, 69, 76,
81, 83, 88, 106, 141
National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) 3, 4,
23, 46, 50, 57, 58, 59, 60, 69, 76, 78, 98,
99–100, 103, 141
142
specialist
Standard
EN
Sites of Special Scientific Interest ((S
social goods ds see

st support 10
102
ard Professional
(SSSIs) 24,
developmen contributions
ee development
Services Contract 103

ofessional Se
neighbour consultation 28 strategic
ategic sstage 20–21, 39–42
tegic definition sta
IM
neighbourhood plans 2, 41, 69, 110–111 trategic Industrial Land (SIL) 24, 142
Strategic
non-designated heritage assets 33, 34 supplementary
upplementary p planning documents (SPDs) 2, 23,
nuisance action 82, 83 107, 10108, 142
108
surveys
veys 4848, 79
obligations packages see development sustainability
sustainab
ai 21–22
EC
contributions
operation conditions 82–84 Tedham Farm, Hexham, Northumberland 66, 69,
Tedh
outline applications 48, 55–58, 60–61,
1, 77
61, 70–73, 113–136
ownership certificates 49 timescales
appeals 96, 99–100, 101
party walls 11–12 deemed discharge procedures 80–81
SP
permission in principle (PIP)

P) consent 14
14–15 determination of applications 59, 95
permitted development (PD) 16–17,
PD) 8, 10–12, 16–
16 discharge of conditions 78, 79–80
141 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 7, 8–9, 60,
planning appeals see appeals
als 61, 87
planning consultants 102 Town and Country Planning (Development
planning guarantees 59 Management Procedure) (England) Order
planning history of site 22–23 2015 57–58, 79–80, 81
Planning Inspectorate 96, 98–99, 141 Town and Country Planning (General Permitted
planning law and regulation 7–8 Development) (England) Order 2015 10,
planning obligations 76, 88 16–17, 80, 141
planning performance agreements 21, 31–32, 141 Town and Country Planning (Use Classes)
Planning Portal 8, 9, 10, 13–14, 15, 47, 48–49, (amendment) (England) Regulations 2020 9
66, 141 Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order
Planning Statements 33 1987 (as amended) 142
planning system
basic framework 1–3 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
design within 3–5 21–22
principles for approaching 19–29, 41–42 use classes 9–10
proactive engagement with 105–110
planning user groups 109–110 validation requirements 46, 47–55, 108
pre-application consultation 19, 21, 22, 24, viability assessments 88
29–30, 69, 77–78
pre-commencement conditions 58–59, 78 ‘Will it fly?’ test 22, 30–31, 39, 40, 68, 69
preparation and briefing stage 42 World Heritage Sites 33, 49
prior approval 15, 16, 17, 80, 141 written representations 98, 100, 102
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
146
IMAGE CREDITS
Figure 0.1 RIBA
Figure 3.1 Colin Haylock
Figures 6.1-6 Spence & Dower
Table 8.1 London Borough of Hammersmith &

Fulham
A.1–27 Spence & Dower
A.28 Michael Drage
A.29-34 Spence & Dower
EN
IM
EC
SP
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
147
EN
IM
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
EC
SP

What’s the best approach to gaining planning permission? How can you
satisfactorily tackle objections? How can you convince planning officers of the
value of your work?
Drawing on substantial experience from both the applicant’s and local planning
authority’s perspective, this book provides tactics and practical steps to help
secure early validation of applications and successful outcomes.
utco
The essential guide to understanding the planning

ning system and maximising the
potential for successful outcomes.
It provides readers with a true understanding

anding of the principles that are vital to
the preparation and negotiation of applications within the context of a complex
regulatory system.
Colin Haylock RIBA, PPFRTPI,

PFRTPI, IHBC is an Architect, Planner and a Member
of the RIBA’s Planning
ng Policy and Strategy Group. He is Principal at Haylock
Planning and Design gn and Partner
Part at Spence and Dower. Colin has over 40
years’ practice experience
ence spanning the public and private sectors. He was
President of the RTPI in 2012 and is still involved with the continuation of CABE
activities through the Design Council. He is a Visiting Professor at the Bartlett
School of Planning and a previous Visiting Professor of Practice in the School of
Architecture, Planning and Landscape at Newcastle University.
IB B
ISBN 978-1-85946-920-0
--`,,,,,,,``,`,`,,`,```,,````,,,-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
9 781859 469200

RIBA - Good Practice Guide - Making Successful Planning Applications

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RIBA - Good Practice Guide - Making Successful Planning Applications

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Good Practice Guide

Copyright RIBA Publishing

Copyright RIBA Publishing

Copyright RIBA Publishing

© RIBA Publishing, 2020

Published by RIBA Publishing, 66 Portland Place, London,

Copyright RIBA Publishing

About the author V

1 Design and the planning system 1

2 Do I need planning consent or any other

3 Principles for approaching the planning

Applications and consents

8 Viability, developer obligations and agreements

9 Appeals, enforcement and using specialist support

10 Proactive engagement with the shaping and operation of

Appendix B: RIBA Plan of Work 2020 137

Image credits 147

Copyright RIBA Publishing

Copyright RIBA Publishing

Enabler for the Commission

Copyright RIBA Publishing

This guide stems from the Jeremy Beecham, Russell Blackburn,

through their practice experience.

Design and Access Statement which

Copyright RIBA Publishing

significantvariation from place to place. Given the scope ffor discretion

planners to guide thee making of pla

al aim of this guide is to help architects navigate the

A relatively brief guide cannot cover all aspects and eventualities in

This approach is particulary important in a period when substantial changes

We appreciate the guide is likely to be referred to for information at various

Standing back from the detail of the planning system,

early sets out

making and application

uide is to help make the conversation between those

involved in the planning system as clear and productive as possible at each

support an effective conversation

possible forr planners tto enengage with and provide responses.

The guidance in this book is intended to provide an accessible distillation

In many cases, it underlines the merits of advancing work on certain aspects

process involved in the

Reduced to its simplest form, the discretionary system requires local

The process of preparing local plans requires extensive local consultation

Copyright RIBA Publishing

Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be

Both the preparation of local plans and the operation

Copyright RIBA Publishing

• Which considerations might indicate that a determination should differ

the more likely it is to no longer accurately

Design within the

At the national level, guidance on design is provided through the NPPF,

• plan-making – the making of planning policy, and

In their plan-making activity, LPAs are required to follow and reflect

As a public process conducted in a democratic context, all these elements

guidance locally beyond the local development plan.

and decision-making g and in the preparation

This approach to guidance on design in planning means that it is vital to

Many planning policies in the area of design refer to a need to respond to

Chapter 3 on ‘Principles for approaching the planning system’ and Chapter 6

Managing the interface between design and planning

operation of the proposal. EN

In ideal terms, an application and pre-application

the planningg context and