This month's conundrum from our e-bulletin, Future Perfect?, reads as follows, as written by Oliver Ennis....
A recent case (Ian Frank Harrison v (1) SS Communities and Local Government (2) Cheshire West and Chester Council (2009)) has added further fuel to the debate about the relationship between the planning system and the integrated pollution prevention and control regime. The case emphasises that the regimes are distinct and serve different purposes. The fact that an environmental permit has been granted does not prevent a planning decision maker from concluding that a development will have an unacceptable impact on local amenity. This is a salutary tale for developers. PPS23 advises that both regimes should complement each other and that developers should give consideration to twin tracking applications. Do you think the current division of responsibilities makes for effective decision making?
Please see my article on page 107 of the Estates Gazette for 30th January 2010 (which follows up on my earlier article on page 76 of the 9th May 2009 issue).
I hope that there will soon be a revision of PPS 23.
Regards,
John Martin
Posted by: John Martin | February 04, 2010 at 02:17 PM