Regulations fail interpretation test

Planning, 29 May 2009

It is eight months since the householder regulations in part 1 of the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO) 1995 were amended. The aim was to reduce the number of minor applications and simplify the regulations so they could be more easily understood. But has this aim been achieved?

The RTPI development management network has been surveying its members on issues regarding implementation. Most respondents were from the public sector and 60 per cent reported a rise in queries as the public and agents struggle to understand the regulations.

It is too early to assess the impact on workload because applications are down anyway during the recession. But planners reported a rise in applications for lawful development certificates and requests for pre-application discussions.

The main difficulty seems to be over the interpretation of new terms, including adapting to different ways of measuring house extensions. Definitions of principal and side elevation, height of eaves, similar appearance and even rear walls when a house has been built with an L shape at the back are posing problems for planners. Some councils have written their own definitions and many suggest that the regulations are vague and poorly drafted. Eventually, there will be case law on some of these issues and planners expect queries to tail off.

One worrying result is a perception that planning permission is not required, with evidence of people altering their homes without seeking consent. The reported lack of clarity in the regulations would seem to signal an increase in enforcement cases and respondents to the survey confirm this to be the case. This suggests that the rule change has complicated rather than clarified the situation concerning minor applications, particularly as enforcement officers now have to spend more time checking developments against the regulations.

Can any lessons be learnt? In their examination of the planning process Joanna Killian and David Pretty proposed extending the GPDO review to other types of development. The Scottish Government is also revising householder regulations.

Implementing regulations on a daily basis, planners' work must be recognised and respected because they are able to explain clearly to the public and their agents what needs planning permission and what does not. Planners were consulted widely on the householder regulations and made many suggestions. Any further review must be done in consultation but the most important lesson is that details have to be drafted very carefully to achieve simplification and clarification.

Janet Askew is head of the department of planning and architecture at the University of the West of England and chairs the RTPI development management network. To join the network or view the survey results, please visit www.rtpi.org.uk/development_management_network.