| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 30:
- Page 26, line 29, at end insert—
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this is not a concession but, having just pocketed one concession well in advance of when it may have been offered, I am mortified—it was not supposed to be that way.
In moving the amendment, and speaking also to government amendments Nos. 31 and 32, I will not repeat what I said earlier. However, the thrust of the amendments is to require applications for planning permission for development to be accompanied by a design statement, an access statement or both. The contents of the statements and the types of development to which they apply would be prescribed by regulations or in a development order.
Previous discussions, at this stage and earlier, have highlighted the importance of providing the right framework to promote design and access, including the ability to stand up to developers where necessary. Along with Clause 39 and planning policy statement 1, that means ensuring proper attention to design and access at all stages of the planning process. If the development does not address those issues, I do not see how it can be regarded as truly sustainable. I beg to move.
Lord Rogers of Riverside: My Lords, I add my wholehearted support to the Government for Amendment No. 30. Noble Lords will remember that I first raised the subject of design statements at Second Reading on 6 January. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, my noble friend Lady Blackstone, and the noble Baroness, Lady Maddock, for their support for amendments in our names calling for applications for planning permission to be accompanied by design statements. I am also grateful to the Royal Institute of British Architects for supporting me and others in our efforts.
Perhaps most of all, I am grateful to the Minister and his colleagues. The Government have listened and responded well. One need only read the debates that we had on design in Committee and on Report to see how well they understand the key argument: that without
In speaking to Amendment No. 34, which is in my name and those of other noble Lords, I seek only clarification from the Minister that "planning permission" in Clause 43 embraces outline planning permission. I am aware of the Written Statement made in the other place by the Minister for Housing and Planning, Keith Hill, on 23 March. The Minister announced that applications for outline planning permission will have to be accompanied by design statements. Will Clause 43 have that effect or do the Government envisage another legislative route?
The Government's amendment places design at the heart of the planning process and that is where it should be. I am delighted and I urge noble Lords to support the amendment.
Baroness Maddock: My Lords, I thank the Minister for bringing forward the amendment at this stage. There has been cross-party support for it all around the House. We have discussed in some detail what we mean by "design". I have two questions for the Minster.
In his letter to us explaining what the amendment does, he said that,
Lord Lucas: My Lords, the Minister has achieved a great deal with the amendments in the group and I am extremely grateful to him.
Baroness Blackstone: My Lords, I wish to add my thanks to my noble friend the Minister and endorse what my noble friend Lord Rogers of Riverside said. We are enormously grateful to the Minister. As a result of his intervention, there will be many more better designed buildings all over the country, and he will have a place in heaven.
Lord Cobbold: My Lords, I, too, echo the words of the noble Baroness on the matter of design. I wish to ask the Minister a question in respect of Amendment No. 32, which relates to listed building consent and
Lord Rooker: My Lords, I am grateful for what has been said, but it is the Minister for planning and the Deputy Prime Minister who have agreed to this, but I have pointed out the strength of feeling in your Lordships' House, on all sides. Then I had to point out why there are four sides in your Lordships' House, of course.
I regret that I am not in a position to answer the detailed questions. As I have said earlier, there has to be consultation. I do not take the phrase "in appropriate circumstances" as a get-out or anything like that. I assure the noble Baroness, Lady Maddock, that it is not put there to undermine the thrust of what we are saying. There may be other circumstances, although I cannot imagine what they might be. The issue of "in appropriate circumstances" is for consultation and secondary legislation, but my notes say it refers to the difference between a domestic application and other applications. In other words, "domestic" might be work that someone wishes to carry out to their home, but that would be slightly different in relation to a new development.
Regarding her question on consultation—there is ongoing consultation on, for example, the standard form provisions in preparation for the powers of Clause 43. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has commissioned consultants to consider the design and content of the standard form for planning permission, listed building and conservation area consent applications, statement of development principle applications—which might now be a waste of time—tree preservation order applications, advertisement consent applications, applications for lawful development certificates; and the consultants have been asked to produce guidance to help applicants complete the forms.
Emerging work from the review suggests that rather than having separate forms for each type of application it would be more efficient to have a basic form for general details, with additional sheets covering different regimes—much like the design of a tax form, it says here.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, no, I have to say that the design of the Inland Revenue tax forms is fantastic, compared to what it has been. It is incredibly user-friendly, one does not need an accountant to fill it in and, with separate sheets, it works extremely well. The consultants' reports that are nearing completion should be available on the ODPM website by the end of March. Before prescribing any form, we will consult on the standard form and its associated guidance. I am informed that we should be in a position to undertake the consultation by the summer, which to me is June, July and August.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Rooker moved Amendments Nos. 31 and 32:
On Question, amendments agreed to.
"(5) A development order must require that an application for planning permission of such description as is specified in the order must be accompanied by such of the following as is so specified—
(a) a statement about the design principles and concepts that have been applied to the development;
(b) a statement about how issues relating to access to the development have been dealt with.
(6) The form and content of a statement mentioned in subsection (5) is such as is required by the development order."
"If we deliver poor design, we know that we will not deliver sustainable development".—[Official Report, 22/1/04; col. 1253.]
He also undertook to take the Bill back to his department and insist that design be included in it. He has kept to his word and the Bill—which until today did not feature the word "design" at all—is now all the stronger for it.
6 p.m.
"The amendments require that in appropriate circumstances . . . "
Will the Minister clarify what he thinks those circumstances are? I would hate to think that we were talking about only a few large projects.
"The detail of the information, and the circumstances in which it should be provided would still be for secondary legislation and guidance, on which we will consult further".
Will the Minister explain that a little more and give us some extra detail about how that might happen? Having said that, I welcome the amendment and hope that the Minister can clarify those points.
Page 27, line 19, at end insert—
"(b) the form or content of any document or other matter which accompanies the application."
Page 27, line 30, at end insert—
"( ) In section 10 of that Act after subsection (3) there are inserted the following subsections—
"(4) The regulations must require that an application for listed building consent of such description as is prescribed must be accompanied by such of the following as is prescribed—
(a) a statement about the design principles and concepts that have been applied to the works;
(b) a statement about how issues relating to access to the building have been dealt with.
(5) The form and content of a statement mentioned in subsection (4) is such as is prescribed.""
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page