Communities secretary places adoption of Birmingham Development Plan on hold

Where the communities secretary considers a development plan document to be unsatisfactory, he has the power under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 to direct the relevant local planning authority (LPA) to alter it before it is adopted.

A new power included in the Housing and Planning Act 2016, and only in force since 26 May, allows the communities secretary to issue a holding direction preventing the relevant LPA from taking steps towards adopting a development plan document while he considers whether or not it should be modified.

According to a statement from Birmingham City Council, Clark has issued a holding direction, temporarily preventing the Council from adopting the Birmingham Development Plan (BDP) until the direction is withdrawn.

An independent planning inspector found the BDP sound in March, despite it providing for the 38,000 homes fewer than are considered to be needed in Birmingham by 2031.

The BDP's policies include the release of land from the green belt to allow for a 6,000-home sustainable urban extension (SUE) at Langley, to the east of Sutton Coldfield. The Conservative MP for Sutton Coldfield, Andrew Mitchell, is opposed to the SUE proposals. According to reports, Mitchell wrote to Clark asking the communities secretary to review the BDP.

The Council was intending to adopt the plan at a meeting in July.

Planning expert Sarah Chapman of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com said: "Clark’s swift use of this new power must have come as a disappointment to Birmingham City Council following what they perceived to be a positive outcome of the Birmingham Development Plan inquiry. With no clear indication in the Act or the explanatory notes as to how long the holding direction can remain in place for, Clark’s intervention raises uncertainty about the delivery of the BDP as a whole and in particular the future of the 6,000-home SUE."

"Clark’s holding direction buys him time to consider whether modifications are required to the BDP or whether to let the Plan be adopted in its current form," said Chapman. "However, the introduction and use of this power so soon after the Act came into force, and before the introduction of any of the other planning powers, is disquieting. The intervention of Andrew Mitchell in this matter to further the interests of his constituents could lead to other politicians applying pressure to the communities secretary to use the new planning powers to further their own political ends."

"Political wrangling of this nature could undermine the local plan process and lead to local plans being delayed or modified when they have otherwise been found sound. There are obvious knock-on effects in respect of a local authority’s ability to deliver on its local plan, in particular housing supply, and uncertainty for developers, if they are looking to have sites allocated in a local plan," Chapman said.