Housing secretary Robert Jenrick has asked Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government civil servants to review advice that ministers and officials receive on matters of planning propriety.
A council has granted permission for 800 homes on land next to a national park, despite planners according “significant weight” to the scheme’s negative landscape and visual impacts.
Labour peer Andrew Adonis has accused Christopher Pincher of “sheer incompetence” and “a very serious breach of the ministerial code” after the housing minister mistakenly told MPs that a yet-to-be-decided appeal had been refused.
A Supreme Court judgment on a pair of listed urns calls into question whether some heritage items on statutory lists can actually be categorised as ‘buildings’ and are therefore eligible for inclusion. Experts say the ruling means that some currently-listed items may therefore be potentially vulnerable to removal.
A Cambridgeshire council which last month agreed to the High Court quashing one of its planning consents has now asked the court to rescind a second consent due to the discovery of “administrative errors” which meant that neighbours were unable to comment on the proposal.
Councillors in Maidstone have voted against plans for 421 homes on a site allocated in the authority’s local plan, in spite of officers’ warnings that refusal would put the council at risk of a successful appeal and “significant” costs.
Plans have been approved for up to 1,200 homes on land adjacent to Cambridge Airport after planners advised that potential safety and residential amenity impacts related to the ongoing use of the airport could be mitigated.
The housing secretary has said the government expects nearly all PINS hearings, inquiries and examinations to take place virtually by mid-June. But there are questions over whether PINS will be able to meet such a deadline, especially as the inspectorate appears to be working to a different timetable.
Plans for a strategic rail freight interchange in the North Yorkshire countryside have been dismissed at appeal after an inspector concluded the proposed development was in conflict with both local and national planning policy.
Barristers have warned of a lack of transparency over the Planning Inspectorate’s (PINS) handling of the coronavirus crisis after the organisation ceased publishing average timescales for its determination of appeals.