Safeguarding the Character of Residential Areas: Draft addendum to PPS 7

Introduction:
In response to recent political pressure to address so-called ‘garden grabbing’, the Planning Service recently published its second Addendum to PPS 7: Safeguarding the Character of Established Residential Areas in draft. The consultation period ends on 5th March 2010.

Unlike other recent draft policies it is not accompanied by a Ministerial Statement, which would give it full weight in determining planning applications. The Department’s approach to the policy’s materiality and weight, however, has been largely inconsistent since its publication.

DPP has recently undertaken an appeal in which the issue of the draft policy’s materiality and weight is being considered by the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC). The PAC’s decision is not yet available but this briefing will be updated should it raise any relevant issues.

The draft addendum proposes three additional policies to those set out in PPS 7 and its earlier addendum. These relate to:

1. 1. Protection of local character and amenity
2. 2. Conversion and sub-division of existing buildings
3. 3. The use of permeable paving

Protecting Local Character and Amenity (Policy LC 1)

The addendum sets out additional criteria for proposals that seek to redevelop existing buildings or infill vacant sites (including garden areas) and is a ‘bolt-on’ to Policy QD1 of PPS 7.

The policy applies in ‘established residential areas’, but not in high density inner city areas, city centres or the frontage of arterial routes in cities and larger towns. Proposals must:

• Develop the site at a density ‘not significantly higher’ than that found in the locality;
• Be in keeping with the overall character and environmental quality of the existing neighbourhood; and
• Meet DSD Housing Association unit size standards

Density

This first provision requires development proposals to be ‘not significantly higher’ than those ‘found in the locality’, but fails to define the significance of any increase, or what would reasonably be considered to be ‘the locality’ of any site. On the face of it this policy replaces the underlying PPS 7 test of ‘no significant harm’ (where higher densities are permissible provided it doesn’t unacceptably harm the character of the area) with a crude density test. It seems to make no provision for the possibility that higher density developments can be accommodated in such areas without material harm to their character.

Character and environmental quality

The second provision requires proposals to be in keeping with the ‘overall character and environmental quality’ of the area, but is virtually indistinguishable from the existing PPS 7 test, which calls for proposals to ‘respect the surrounding context’ and ‘character of the area’. It therefore fails to introduce any material test not already identified in the original policy.

Housing Association standards

The third provision of draft policy LC 1 is for all relevant development proposals to meet DSD Housing Association unit size standards. This seems to be a rigid policy requirement, which fails to reflect the reality that differing unit sizes are often required to meet the needs of specific groups such as students.

Although the purpose of the policy is to ensure a standard of high-quality accommodation, its inflexibility (“all dwelling units to be built to a size not less than those set out in Annex D”) means high quality housing schemes could be refused on grounds of room size alone, without weighing up a proposal’s wider benefit.

The Conversion or Sub-division of Existing Buildings to Flats or Apartments (Policy LC 2)

This policy proposes six tests, two of which are already contained in the existing adopted policies of PPS 7. These are that proposals should have no adverse impact on character and they should maintain or enhance the character/architectural features of the property.

The four new provisions are:

• Original property to be greater than 150m2 gross internal floorspace;
• All flats or apartments to be self contained
• No apartment to be wholly to the rear of the property without access to the public street;
• No reduction in space available for in-curtilage parking.

Again these requirements appear to be overly prescriptive. Of particular note is the requirement to restrict all apartments to the relevant street frontage with no units wholly to the rear. The policy again fails to acknowledge that circumstances may exist where apartments to the rear of developments are entirely acceptable and can create attractive and well designed environments.

Unlike draft Policy LC1 this policy applies to all areas of Northern Ireland.

Permeable Paving in New Residential Developments (Policy LC 3)

This is a straightforward policy encouraging the use of permeable paving ‘where appropriate’. It states that favourable consideration will be given to schemes that propose such material.

How DPP can help

The latest PPS 7 Addendum creates a further layer of uncertainty around infill residential development in Northern Ireland. Developers will be well advised to make representations to the Department if they wish to influence the direction of the policy.

At DPP we are able to advise you on the finer detail of the draft policy and the most recent position on its materiality and weight in respect of current planning applications. We can use our considerable expertise to help guide your application though the increasingly complex planning system.

For further information please contact the Belfast office.