Overview

This Planning Bill amendment focuses on protecting gardens and green spaces during the planning process. The House of Lords proposed amendments to strengthen protections, but the House of Commons disagreed, citing the amendments as unnecessary or interfering with their financial authority.

Description

Lords Amendment 115: Garden and Green Space Protection

This amendment aimed to add a new clause to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. It would require planning authorities to give "special regard" to preserving gardens and urban green spaces when making decisions. The definition of "green space" was broadened to include various types of land, from public gardens to wildlife areas.Crucially, it restricted the ability of higher-tier planning authorities to overturn local decisions protecting green spaces, unless it was essential for national housing targets or the local decision was improper. It also prevented the imposition of housing density targets that would override green space protection. The Commons rejected this amendment.

Lords Amendment 160: Regulatory Scrutiny

This amendment proposed a 60-day delay before the House of Commons approves certain regulations, allowing time for parliamentary debate and committee review. The Commons rejected this, citing it as a matter of their own financial arrangements.

Government Spending

Neither amendment directly allocated or changed government spending. However, the rejection of Amendment 115 might indirectly affect spending if it leads to less green space protection, potentially increasing costs related to environmental damage or loss of amenity value. The rejection of Amendment 160 may be interpreted as limiting scrutiny of financial regulations.

Groups Affected

• Local residents: Amendment 115's rejection could negatively impact residents who value local green spaces, potentially leading to increased development in these areas.
• Local planning authorities: The rejection weakens their power to protect green spaces, potentially forcing them to prioritize national housing targets over local preferences.
• Environmental groups: The rejection diminishes protections for biodiversity and green spaces.
• Developers: The rejection of Amendment 115 could make it easier to secure planning permission for developments on greenfield sites.
• Parliament: Amendment 160's rejection reduces parliamentary oversight of regulations, potentially affecting transparency and accountability.

Powered by nyModel