Immediate publication of applications as A556 project consented
This entry reports on the switch to immediate publication of applications and the 22nd development consent decision.
Immediate publication
On Friday, the government amended its guidance on the pre-application process to refer to the immediate publication of application documents once an application has been made (although strictly speaking this isn't a pre-application measure).
Paragraphs 97-100 have been added to the end of this document.
Essentially they say that with the applicant's permission, the suite of application documents will be published on the Planning Inspectorate website 'as soon as practicable' after submission.
To deter those who aren't local authorities from piling in with 'adequacy of consultation' complaints, the guidance states that the government only needs to take such representations into account if they come from local authorities.
The guidance also says that if an application is not accepted, the application documents will be removed again.
This will probably take effect from the next application to be made, and will give interested parties a few more days (28 minus 'as soon as practicable') to look at the application documents and think about representations, so is a good thing. Applicants may refuse to allow this, of course, but we shall see if any do. The latest application, for the East Midlands Gateway rail freight interchange, was made on Friday, so we'll see what happens with that one.
[UPDATE: the application documents - all 660 of them - were published on 2 September, two working days after the application was received.]
There may be some wasted reading effort if an application is not accepted, but only three out of 52 applications have not been accepted so far, and two of those were resubmitted with almost the same application documents, so the chances of that are low.
A556
On Thursday, the Secretary of State gave development consent for the A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Improvements project in Cheshire, the first application to be made under the Planning Act 2008 by the Highways Agency.
The application was first made on 24 April 2013. The facts and stats on the application are as follows:
- project: to upgrade the A556 between the M6 and the M56;
- promoter: the Highways Agency;
- one inspector, Peter Robottom, who was the single inspector on the first highway project to be consented, the Heysham to M6 Link Road;
- 72 relevant representations, a lowish number for the size of the project;
- 27 written representations, fairly typical;
- 38 questions in the first round - very low these days;
- one open floor hearing, five compulsory acquisition hearings and four issue-specific hearings;
- one Local Impact Report, from host unitary authority Cheshire East;
- examination exactly six months, recommendation one day less than three months, decision five days less than three months;
- 491 days from application to decision, i.e. 16 months, a little below average.
Small plug: with this seventh decision, BDB maintains its record of acting on the most applications, the most consents and no withdrawn or refused applications.
The week after next will be a bumper week for decisions, with the Killingholme power station, the Thames Tideway Tunnel and the Clocaenog onshore wind farm all due.
On Friday, the government amended its guidance on the pre-application process to refer to the immediate publication of application documents once an application has been made (although strictly speaking this isn't a pre-application measure).
Paragraphs 97-100 have been added to the end of this document.
Essentially they say that with the applicant's permission, the suite of application documents will be published on the Planning Inspectorate website 'as soon as practicable' after submission.
To deter those who aren't local authorities from piling in with 'adequacy of consultation' complaints, the guidance states that the government only needs to take such representations into account if they come from local authorities.
The guidance also says that if an application is not accepted, the application documents will be removed again.
This will probably take effect from the next application to be made, and will give interested parties a few more days (28 minus 'as soon as practicable') to look at the application documents and think about representations, so is a good thing. Applicants may refuse to allow this, of course, but we shall see if any do. The latest application, for the East Midlands Gateway rail freight interchange, was made on Friday, so we'll see what happens with that one.
[UPDATE: the application documents - all 660 of them - were published on 2 September, two working days after the application was received.]
There may be some wasted reading effort if an application is not accepted, but only three out of 52 applications have not been accepted so far, and two of those were resubmitted with almost the same application documents, so the chances of that are low.
A556
On Thursday, the Secretary of State gave development consent for the A556 Knutsford to Bowdon Improvements project in Cheshire, the first application to be made under the Planning Act 2008 by the Highways Agency.
The application was first made on 24 April 2013. The facts and stats on the application are as follows:
- project: to upgrade the A556 between the M6 and the M56
- promoter: the Highways Agency
- one inspector, Peter Robottom, who was the single inspector on the first highway project to be consented, the Heysham to M6 Link Road
- 72 relevant representations, a lowish number for the size of the project
- 27 written representations, fairly typical
- 38 questions in the first round - very low these days
- one open floor hearing, five compulsory acquisition hearings and four issue-specific hearings
- one Local Impact Report, from host unitary authority Cheshire East
- examination exactly six months, recommendation one day less than three months, decision five days less than three months
- 491 days from application to decision, i.e. 16 months, a little below average.
Small plug: with this seventh decision, BDB maintains its record of acting on the most applications, the most consents and no withdrawn or refused applications.
The week after next will be a bumper week for decisions, with the Killingholme power station, the Thames Tideway Tunnel and the Clocaenog onshore wind farm all due.
- See more at: http://www.bdb-law.co.uk/news-and-views/blogs/planning-act-2008/2014/august/574-immediate-publication-of-applications-as-a556-project-consented/#sthash.EAsCZcQP.dpuf