CONTEXT 182 : DECEMBER 2024 9 Law and policy update Alexandra Fairclough writes: England At the time of writing, recent planning discussions in the media have included densifying cities to address the housing shortages and the emergence of a new London Plan in 2025. A new private member’s Permitted Development Rights (Extension) Bill had its first reading in September. The bill would extend permitted development rights to allow householders to improve and extend their residential properties and for connected purposes. It includes provision for increased roof and eaves heights, larger side and rear extensions to dwellings, and taller buildings in town centres. It provides for air-source heat‑pumps; solar panels that do not rise more than 0.15 metres above the roof finish surface, and electric vehicle charging points. These proposed changes will have a significant impact on heritage assets. Northern Ireland The Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024 (SR 176). The Department of Infrastructure has introduced legislation for councils to bring forward checklists to support the validation process. This means that checklists would have to be adhered to for an application to be valid. Wales The Historic Environment (Wales) Act 2023 came into force on 4 November 2024. Scotland In September, Historic Environment Scotland released its delivery framework, ‘Our Past Our Future’, a national strategy for the historic environment. This and other documents outline the position of the historic environment sector, and its role and potential in communities and the economy in Scotland in the future. In October, Historic Environment Scotland announced plans for a dedicated national centre to champion the retrofit of traditional buildings to improve energy efficiency and play a key role in achieving national net zero targets. Consultations The Minister for Housing, Communities and Local Government has published an online survey on ‘Demolition and Retrofit in National Planning Policy’. The survey seeks the views of stakeholders about whether the government should update national planning policy and guidance regarding the demolition and redevelopment or retrofit of buildings. The new Historic England Advice Note ‘Adapting Historic Buildings for Energy and Carbon Efficiency’, dated July 2024, may require an update. This document helps decision makers to be consistent in their approach to improve efficiency and reduce carbon emissions in relation to heritage assets, and to ensure that the heritage significance is maintained. It provides detailed advice on permissions and consents, and examples of common climate-change adaptations. Case law: Stonehenge R (on the application of Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport and Others [2024] EWCA Civ 1227 In 2023, SAVE Stonehenge World Heritage Site issued another claim for judicial review. Although the government announced that it was not going to go ahead with the project in July 2024, a decision was taken to continue the case to judgement as the development consent order (DCO) remains extant. This challenge was to review whether the decision for a development consent order had been lawfully made. Five main issues arose. The Court of Appeal concluded: • the redetermination process was conducted properly and fairly, and the DCO was awarded legally • the ministerial briefing given to the secretary of state was legally adequate, the website links were legally adequate and the secretary of state did not fail to consider matters he ought to have considered • the secretary of state’s view on the scheme’s compliance with the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage was legally sound • the risk of the world heritage site being delisted and the likely impact of delisting was adequately considered • the secretary of state’s consideration of the then current review of the National Policy Statement for National Networks in the light of the UK’s net zero commitment was legally adequate. Permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was refused. Although the decision did not go into the environmental or societal merits of the development proposed or assess the decision From Stonehenge to D-Day
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=