|
|
|
Author |
|
Message | |
|
silenthavendevon
Joined: 21 Nov 2012 Posts: 20
|
|
|
|
|
tahir
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 45674 Location: Essex
|
|
|
|
|
silenthavendevon
Joined: 21 Nov 2012 Posts: 20
|
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 14 7:08 pm Post subject: Thanks, but... |
|
Thanks,
but I would say it was slightly more than 'getting lucky'. I am aware of two other low impact projects in Devon (Steward Wood and Land Matters communities) that have been given consent. Land Matters at least was also by the inspectorate, retrospectively. Both were given consent partly on the basis of their 'permaculture' approaches, (problems with the term / approach admitted). As in our case the permaculture approach was seen as part of the justification (quite rightly) for the appelants living at their place of work, and thereby saving energy.
Planning guidance does sometimes change in response to societal needs, even minority needs, as evidenced by the recent 'One Planet' Welsh national policy, and as evidenced by the term 'low impact development' and 'permaculture' in different local policies nationwide, if not yet national policy.
The fact of the 'material consideration' clause in national planning policy means that in practice, any individual project benefit or circumstance can add weight to a project gaining permission, even where the project doesn't adhere to all the local and national policies more widely. In our case mental health needs was one material consideration, permaculture was another material consideration, the fact that our building is not visible and has no permanent foundations was another material consideration, and so on.
The more projects that invoke similar or identical material considerations in a given area, the more likely that local authority is likely to reflect that in Local Plan amendments in the long run (in my view) and the more it happens nationally, the more national policy is likely to change (in my view) as it has in Wales.
Additionally, the inspector invoked the relatively new National Planning Policy Framework which has a clause stating 'a presumption in favour of sustainable development', as another material consideration that overruled local council policies. (Yes it is strange that official policies themselves are viewed as material considerations when opposed against the bulk of planning policies related to a case).
Cynically, I am the first to admit that the new, very concise yet vague NPPF is an excuse for big developers to rush through developments that they can argue are 'sustainable' (e.g. by sticking a load of solar panels on the roof) but the silver lining, meanwhile, may be that more low impact projects are also allowed. This doesn't mean that the policies won't get more strict again -I'm sure they will.
Again cynically, they will probably get more strict as they realise their big-business favouring NPPF is also allowing us little guys to nip through the massive hole they have made.
But while the climate is relatively favourable, and while the odds may still be against succeeding (you're right that luck did play a big element in our case) I would say to anyone who can hack the stress, 'go for it'.
Just my thoughts for your consideration. |
|
|
|
|
Ty Gwyn
Joined: 22 Sep 2010 Posts: 4613 Location: Lampeter
|
|
|
|
|
Mistress Rose
Joined: 21 Jul 2011 Posts: 15993
|
|
|
|
|
Nick
Joined: 02 Nov 2004 Posts: 34535 Location: Hereford
|
|
|
|
|
Lorrainelovesplants
Joined: 13 Oct 2006 Posts: 6521 Location: Dordogne
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
|