Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Neighbourhood Forum
Out of interest, has anyone got the ball rolling to create a Harringay Neighbourhood Forum in line with the Localism Act? Or perhaps an existing organisation is putting itself forward for the role (as the Highgate Society are doing)? There are a couple of such initiatives west of the tracks, and I'm curious who else is doing so locally.
Ben
Tags for Forum Posts: neighbourhood forum, neighbourhood planning
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Omotn on
-
This is interesting stuff.
Schedule 9, 61F (5): clearly is not aimed purely at getting planning applications through - as Hugh says obfuscation.
Is there an implication here that in, say Crouch End Ward (which I might think of being a neighbourhood) that the pre-existing groups The Glasslyn Road Residents Association, The Weston Park Neighbourhood Watch and the Crouch End Conservation Area Advisory Committee might all become Neighbourhood Fora? Assuming thay meet the criteria and the council recognises them.
And the Stamford Hill example does not match David Browne's picture of a pre-existing group being designated as a "Neighbourhood Forum" - in this case a cross party alliance has simply invented itself with the sole aim of being a NF. Is this within the terms of the act. And looking at their quotes they seem quite narrowly focussed on "sustainability" not the other tihings Hugh quotes.
And by just suddenly inventing themselves and arbitrarily bagging an area they seem to be embodying David Barry's democratic who?, what?, why? concerns
-
Permalink Reply by David Browne on
-
Hugh, you raise some interesting questions and I will try to address them. The quote you take from Section 61F Subsection 5 is a description of the type of organisation that may apply to become a neighbourhood forum. It does not describe the purpose or scope of the neighbourhood forum. If Acts of Parliament were drafted in plain English it would more likely read “an organisation acting as a neighbourhood forum in promoting a development scheme” or words to that effect.
The purpose of a neighbourhood forum is prescribed in the Act under the provisions for creating neighbourhood development orders. They are the alternative to the Planning Permissions for local development schemes. This is covered in detail in Schedule 9 of the Act.
Schedule 9 is the Neighbourhood Planning part of the Act and starts with neighbourhood development orders (Section 61E), what I call the shortcut to planning permission, and then goes on to define what qualifies an organisation to be the originator of a neighbourhood development order. This is the neighbourhood forum’s only purpose. Other aspects of community engagement come from the organisation’s own pre-existing purposes and objectives, hence my analogy with the GL Strategy Group. The Strategy Group has no planning function at present but could have, if it were to be designated as a neighbourhood forum in order to get planning permissions through a neighbourhood development order for the Green Lanes regeneration.
The concept of Localism Act neighbourhood forums is therefore very specifically geared to being the shortcut to planning permission, and the designation of a community group as a neighbourhood forum does not give it any further rights as people the Council could do business with on the general well-being of neighbourhoods, except specifically in terms of local planning and development. Let me put it like this, informally: if a community group has no intention of promoting development in its area it would not become a Localism Act neighbourhood forum. It cannot become a neighbourhood forum to oppose development. Objections to proposals for development would still go through Planning as at present.
There are other sections within Schedule 9 that state that neighbourhood forums cannot overlap in terms of territory and there can only be one neighbourhood forum for a defined neighbourhood area (see subsection 7(b) in Section 61F). So there is no scope for wrangling between, for example, a residents association and a local strategy partnership in the same locality as to whose development scheme gets the development order/planning permission.
-
Permalink Reply by Arkady on
-
The government-sponsored consultants that I have been hearing from (from Locality) advised that the Neighbourhood Plan (i.e. the wider agreed document rather just specific development orders) can be quite broad but also quite specific. So it can specify which areas are suitable for redevelopment, what that development should be (i.e. use and design guides) which areas are *not* suitable for development (e.g. conservation areas) and what changes should be permitted there or otherwise (i.e. putting conservation guidance on a firmer standing).
They can also contain statements of principle about streetscaping, etc. So while the Act is designed to allow communities to assist in giving developers a feeling of security, by identifying the content and space of redevelopment areas, they also allow for stronger conservation measures by default.
Further, they have stressed that the government is unlikely to release much detailed guidance on the Act, as they want communities and councils to test the boundaries on their own. Therefore we may not know the full potential scope of these Forums until they have been launched and tested.
You state that there is no point setting up a NF in an area where development is not expected. My concern (and the frantic concern in Highgate) is that if no such NF is established by groups keen on conservation and limited development then one may be formed by people who have no such concerns or scruples. I’d be interested in your thoughts on that.
-
-
Arkady, my thoughts are as set out in earlier posts, that there is some misunderstanding about neighbourhood forums envisaged by the Localism Act. Some confusion of terminology here, I guess. Any residents can organise public meetings to discuss concerns and call their group a neighbourhood forum but this is not a Neighbourhood Forum under the Localism Act unless its purpose is to promote development and new building in the neighbourhood. Don’t take my word for it, read this from a Department for Communities document published in January:
“The empowerment of neighbourhood communities will lead to community ownership of plans and plans that better reflect the wishes of local communities. It is hoped that this will lead to behavioural change in such a way as to make local communities more predisposed to accept development. As a result, it is anticipated that greater community engagement, coupled with financial incentives, could lead to an increase in development.”
The examples of neighbourhood forums given in this discussion so far, in Highgate, Stroud Green and Stamford Hill, do not appear to conform to the pro-development theme of the Localism Act Neighbourhood Forums. A better example is pilot scheme set up in Bankside, Southwark. See http://www.betterbankside.co.uk/news/2443-neighbourhood-plan
Still not sure what I’m getting at? Read this from Decentralisation Minister Greg Clark:
"The large number of communities, eager to trial neighbourhood planning proves that localism and growth do go hand in hand. By giving local people a greater say and incentives to benefit from growth, communities will start to welcome development rather than resist it."
The whole thrust of this part of the Localism Act is to encourage increased development and more building but without local plans taking up time in the Planning Committee. Read this from the Department for Communities Impact Assessment of neighbourhood planning:
“Localism is intended to enable communities to find their own ways of overcoming the tensions between development and conservation, environmental quality and pressure on services. Communities and local authorities are likely to then become the proponents – rather than the opponents – of appropriate growth. Alongside fiscal incentives such as the New Homes Bonus and Community Infrastructure Levy and appropriate policy on neighbourhood planning in the national planning policy framework, it is anticipated that greater involvement of the community will lead to an overall increase in development compared with the status quo, and an increase in development that is in-line with local needs.”
There’s plenty more where that came from. Read what the Localism Act actually says, and the explanatory notes, Department guidance and press releases as I have done, then tell me what development the neighbourhood forums in Highgate, Stroud Green and Stamford Hill want to promote.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
So it's all about promoting development and building ?
Do we want to be developed and built on ?
-
-
As I said earlier, in the enthusiasm to establish neighbourhood forums, beware what you wish for.
-
-
Hi David. Can you address my specifics point about:
a) the danger of not setting up a NF, given that a pro-development group might do so if those who want to limit development do not do so first? Where does it say that a NF must have a certain attitude to development before it is recognised? I can't see that in any of the criteria in the Act. The government consultants informed us that you can establish a NF before having any plan or policy at all.
b) you still haven't made a distinction between the Neighbourhood Plan, which can be a broad and nuanced document, and a Development Order which promotes a specific development. In Stroud Green & Highgate (and I dare say Harringay) for instance, there are a number of small sites containing ugly post-war builds which could be identified as sites of potential future redevelopment. The plan could also contain design guides defining how any such development should relate to the existing built environment. It could also state which areas are not suitable for development, e.g. conservation areas.
I want to maintain a healthy scepticism, but the advice I have been given has not left me as cynical as you... yet.
-
-
In reply to your point (a) I offer this clarification from the Communities Department:
One of the principal objectives of neighbourhood planning is to increase the rate of growth of housing and economic development in England. Coupled with a system of powerful financial incentives, neighbourhood planning will achieve this by enabling neighbourhood communities to exercise real power in respect of the design and precise location of the development that takes place in the neighbourhood area. Moreover, in order to guarantee that neighbourhood planning cannot lead to a lower rate of growth, a neighbourhood plan will only be able to advocate an equal or greater quantity of growth in housing or economic development than is established in the development plan.
Source: Impact Assessment: Neighbourhood plans and Community Right to Build, DCLG January 2012
There is no scope in the Localism Act for a Neighbourhood Forum to be set up to oppose development.
-
-
-
Sure I understand that. But that makes my point. Is there not a choice between:
a) setting up an NF to focus development on specific areas that the community considers to be candidates, such as ugly post-war builds (which are often underdevelopments) while reinforcing conservation areas, or
b) not setting one up and risking one being established by those with a less nuanced approach?
No-one is talking about establishing either Forum or Plan that says 'no more development, period'. Not even Highgate. The Plans have to be in accordance with national policy, the London Plan and borough plans after all. I don't think a 'no development' plan would even be desirable.
-
-
-
In reply to your point (b), the neighbourhood plan is as you describe, and the neighbourhood development order is the technical document equivalent to planning permission once it's approved by a majority of those voting in a neighbourhood referendum. I offer this from the DCLG's Introduction to Neighbourhood Planning published last year while the Bill was still in Parliament:
"With a neighbourhood plan, communities will be able to establish general planning policies for the development and use of land in a neighbourhood. They will be able to say, for example, where new homes and offices should be built, and what they should look like. The neighbourhood plan will set a vision for the future. It can be detailed, or general, depending on what local people want.
"With a neighbourhood development order, the community can grant planning permission for new buildings they want to see go ahead. Neighbourhood development orders will allow new homes and offices to be built without the developers having to apply for separate planning permission.
"Local people can choose to draw up either a plan, or a development order, or both. It is entirely up to them. Both must follow some ground rules:
They must generally be in line with local and national planning policies
They must be in line with other laws"If the local planning authority says that an area needs to grow, then communities cannot use neighbourhood planning to block the building of new homes and businesses. They can, however, use neighbourhood planning to influence the type, design, location and mix of new development."
-
-
-
"They can, however, use neighbourhood planning to influence the type, design, location and mix of new development."
This is the bit that interests me. Development will happen anyway to a certain extent; neighbourhood plans can shape it in all sorts of ways, including keeping it out of conservation areas and aesthetically improving the built environment elsewhere. Who wouldn't want to do that?
-
-
-
Arkady, my thoughts are as set out in earlier posts, that there is some uhmisunderstanding about neighbourhood forums envisaged by the Localism Act. Some confusion of terminology here, I guess. Any residents can organise public meetings to discuss concerns and call their group a neighbourhood forum but this is not a Neighbourhood Forum under the Localism Act unless its purpose is to promote development and new building in the neighbourhood. Don’t take my word for it, read this from a Department for Communities document published in January:
and
The purpose of a neighbourhood forum is prescribed in the Act under the provisions for creating neighbourhood development orders. They are the alternative to the Planning Permissions for local development schemes. This is covered in detail in Schedule 9 of the Act......... This is the neighbourhood forum’s only purpose. Other aspects of community engagement come from the organisation’s own pre-existing purposes and objectives.
I am interested in exploring what David Browne says here a little further. We too in Marylebone have heard that the sole purpose of a neighbourhood forum is to create a neighbourhood plan and or neighbourhood development order (NDO). After this has been done it could be wound up and in any event will be after 5 years. It is not,as many believe, a sort of amenity society with enhanced powers. At the same time we feel that the our amenity association does not fully satisfy the requirements of Schedule 9 so that to set up a Forum we have to form a separate entity which seems a lot of work for the specific functions and life it may have.
I have a couple of observations following from this which could justify its continuing existence and wider scope.
1. The process of adopting a neighbourhood plan is only the beginning. It will require support and continued care to deliver its goals.
2. Neighbourhood forums can be also used to bring forward the so called community empowerment provisions; The community right to challenge - and the community right to build - which is another another form of NDO that can be applied for at any time.
3. If an NDO is rejected in a referendum, could the neighbourhood forum bring forward another amended one? If so its life would be prolonged.
4. The duty of developers to consult with the community, another reason why forums could have a continuing existence
For all these reasons it would seem that a neighbourhood forum could outlive its original function, say the adoption of an NDO. Further is there anything at present (I know we still await the regulations) that would prevent it's constitution embracing other aspects of community engagement? There does not seem to be.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
