DDRA follow the Solihull MBC web site to be informed of current planning applications. Click on the above link to view current applications. If you have a concern, contact the planning secretary - contact details on the About DDRA page of this site.
Let me introduce myself. I am Ian Spencer, and in April 2005 I became Dorridge and District Residents Association (DDRA) Planning Secretary.
I am interested in creating a more transparent planning policy for DDRA - in the end the danger is that it can be a small group of peoples' views that are being represented, not the diverse population of Dorridge and Bentley Heath.
DDRA follow the Solihull MBC web site to be informed of current planning applications. This section of our web site discusses how we approach planning application reviews. We are very interested in local residents' opinions and welcome your feedback.
You can assume that any large development will gain our attention. We are not anti-development, we just want to ensure that any development is an improvement to the area, not harmful. We are less likely to take an interest in smaller extensions, except where it is clear that there is something inappropriate going on, e.g. damage to trees or we are approached by an upset neighbour who feels they cannot raise an issue.
It is worth noting that we have no role in deciding what is good or bad, we can only bring matters to the attention of the LPA. We can only hope to influence the planning committee with sound arguments.
If you are considering a development, either a small extension or something more substantial, we strongly recommend that you discuss it with those likely to be affected before you submit plans to the Council. There are several benefits, not least that you will get a better understanding of the affect you will have on your neighbours. It is worth pointing out that under current planning law you do not have a right to develop your property, instead it has to comply with the development plan. It is therefore worth discussing what you intend to do - if there are legitimate objections then sorting these out before you get to submission of plans will avoid positions getting entrenched. One of the biggest issues DDRA has with developers is that they are reluctant to revise their plans to really address the issues that concern neighbours, often because they have already committed themselves to details.
It is worth noting at the start that planning guidance and common sense do not necessarily coincide, so although you may be outraged at some development, the Council (or rather the Local Planning Authority - LPA) may not have good cause to refuse an application.
In dealing with a planning application, it is helpful to be aware of the way the planning system works. Essentially national policy is set by a set of planning guidelines. Guidelines are just that, the Local Planning Authority (LPA) is guided by these, however, they cannot simply apply them as law, nor can they dismiss them. The decision ultimately rests with the LPA. The main planning guideline for housing developments is PPS3 which replaces PPG3 as of April 2007, but can be relevant before (see links).
Then there is a regional planning strategy, then the then the Local Development Framework (LDF) which has replaced the Urban Development Policy of Solihull (UDP), and there also exists the possibility of local policies for this area Supplementary Planning Guidance (now being replaced with Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) (wake up at the back!).
When considering a planning application, it is worth looking at these documents. There is a lot of latitude: don't be persuaded that the Council must allow a development; in the first instance an application should meet the Development Plan. Indeed one of the best things about PPS3 is that it has as its basis good design. Though brownfield development is encouraged, there is nothing in PPG3 or PPS3 that forces the Councils to accept inappropriate development, the opposite is the case and the Government emphasises the defence is the provision of ensuring the greening of the environment. The issue is ensuring that the inappropriateness is clearly presented. In the UDP, Solihull has support for the view that high density housing should only be accepted if it does not have undue impact.
One issue which causes confusion is the idea that a development is supported or approved of by planning guidelines. Developers often state this, but it is a nonsensical position. The planning guidelines represent a balance of issues and it is unlikely that any development will be compliant on all issues. Applicants will cherry pick favourable items, ignoring less favourable ones. Similarly, it is incorrect to state that Planning Officers are in favour of or against a development - their role is to assess the development against the guidelines and law and come to an objective opinion as to whether the development on balance meets planning guidelines. If they do not, and they rarely will meet all the criteria, they must decide whether the benefit of the development outweighs the harm.
In principle, it is not the number of objections that count, nor where they come from, but the quality of objection. The exceptions are that the planning committee will take special note of the objections of near neighbours, and Residents Associations. The LPA will tend to give less weight to standard letters of objection. You are better off with ten well drafted, individual complaints rather than 100 standard letters with signatures.
There are two ways of viewing objections:
It is helpful if you give some reasons why you support or oppose the proposal. However those comments must be relevant and based on planning matters for the LPA to consider them. These include :-
Planning matters do not include:
Having said that, a well argued letter may strike a chord with your Councillors and the LPA is an independent body - planning guidance is just that and the LPA cannot act as if guidance is law, though it cannot ignore it either. If you are not sure whether a point is relevant, raise the issue. It is for the LPA to weigh the issue, and if irrelevant, then they can ignore it and it does not invalidate your other points.
Talk to the Planning Officer, they will be able to guide you on what is important, and what can be discounted. They should not unduly favour either party. Bear in mind that the officer's opinion of what is material and relevant is their own view, not the view of the sub-committee, and they often do not have your local knowledge so if you have any doubt, make sure that you write with any objection, and also it is worth documenting any phone conversations.
Also, your local Councillors should be able to offer advice and guidance, and may well speak on your behalf.
Make the effort to attend the Planning Committee meeting: if the Committee members have an audience then they may be more careful how they present their arguments.
Make sure any application goes to sub-committee. You can ask your local councillor to make sure this happens. We recommend this for objectors as that route allows the officer's report to be reviewed before the decision is made. Sometimes officers do not cover the issues we might expect them to cover. The sub-committee have a good track record of fair judgements.
Shortly before the committee meeting, get hold of the officer's report, it comes out on Wednesday Night as part of the meeting agenda. Read it carefully and write forcefully to Development Control if you spot any errors and omissions - this report is the only view of the planning file that gets to the sub-committee.
If you wish to speak, a speaker must register to speak before 12 noon on the day before the meeting. Bookings are taken on a first come first served basis and there can only be one speaker for and against.
The sub-committee often make a site visit on the Saturday before the sub-committee meeting. The format is that the officers make a short presentation, showing the plans and summarising their report. An objector then speaks, the applicant can speak, possibly rebutting the points made in the objector's address, each limited to three minutes only. Then a Councillor can speak. He is not time limited (sometimes this is a good thing though we have heard times when it is not!) so you can understand why it can be useful to enlist their support in a complex matter.
The sub-committee may then debate the issues. The flavour of the decision normally becomes apparent early on. Officers respond to requests for guidance and clarification from the committee and the Head of Planning will normally then advise on whether any conditions or reasons for refusal are sound. The committee sometimes override this advice where they are certain of their reasoning.
A vote is then taken and the decision is made. There is no right of appeal for objectors, developers can resubmit, appeal, whatever. The only recourse you really have is a formal complaint, but this is not going to overturn a decision.
A couple of good techniques for speaking are:
It is a near certainty that an applicant has a development rejected, the applicant will appeal to the Planning Inspectorate. Placing an appeal has the advantage of trying to get the plans as submitted through and yet it does not stop the applicant placing further applications for the same site, within reason. Currently, appeals take a long time to be processed.
The Inspectorate view the application from the point of view of the Secretary of State and take an independent view of the application: they consider the application as a whole, not just the decision of the Sub-Committee.
The process is described in a leaflet available from the Planning Inspectorate. The main points to note are:
An issue that still confuses us at times is that of permitted development rights. There are many things that can be done to a property that do not require planning permission: for example someone could render a house and paint it purple without needing permission. Some building work does not need permission but might still require approval under building regulations - for example, you might be allowed to put a small extension on your building without permission but it still has to be constructed to required standards. Advice from the council is free, so avoid a problem by talking to them. The SMBC web site has further information on this.
Permitted development rights were radically overhauled in 2008. Now the rules are quite simple - defining a distance that buildings can be extended at one or two stories and to the side. The amount that can be added can be quite large with few restrictions aside from what can be done alonside a boundary and at the front.
A peculiarity of permitted rights is that sometimes a planning application is made which the committee rely on details such as materials to determine whether the building is suitable fit for the area, yet some of this detail relies on the cooperation of the developer and could be changed under permitted development rights. It makes something of a nonsense of protecting the street scene under planning applications when individuals can make significant changes without permission. LPAs are discouraged from removing permitted development rights, but it can be done. An example that concerns us is where we see over-sized properties granted permission with very little garden, yet these properties can then be further extended under permitted development rights. These rights are often removed on large developments, but the LPA is inconsistent and reluctant to remove these rights in similar circumstances of infill developments.
The Council should take action against anyone developing without permission. However, their hands are tied to a certain extent: it only becomes unlawful if they have taken enforcement action and the developer resists this. Don't assume that the Council will know about developments, they need to be told.
There is also a question of finding the right people to complain to:
Here is a copy of the SMBC document on Planning Enforcement (PDF ~ 1.4M). Also, the offical planning guidelines PPG18 are quite readable too. You can find them here.
© 2008-2011 DDRA. The DDRA is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites.
