Standard planning condition

[Mike Priaulx]

Hi all, I'm just letting you know that the standard planning condition created by the SLN Swifts & Planning Group is now in the SLN library (http://tinyurl.com/SLNlibrary ):

* File name: Standard Planning Condition - Template 2025

* Located in folder: Planning Process/ Planning Applications & Conditions

I've attached a Word copy for easy reference.

Any questions just let me know

(planning advice available at swifts....@gmail.com ).

All the best,

Mike

Member of SLN Swifts & Planning Group

+++

On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 8:57 AM Mike Priaulx <michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi all,

The SLN Swifts & Planning Group have produced a standard planning condition which you can suggest to your local planning department, and add to comments on planning applications. I will place this in the SLN library.

This condition is based on a condensed version of the British Standard standard condition, with elements of the Brighton & Hove standard condition, plus additional text relating to post-construction evidence.

[Mike Priaulx]

Hi all,

Here's a reminder that a standard planning condition is available in the SLN library (http://tinyurl.com/SLNlibrary ):

* File name: Standard Planning Condition - Template 2025

* Located in folder: Planning Process/ Planning Applications & Conditions

I've attached a Word copy for easy reference.

In more detail:

This condition wording is aimed at reducing non-compliance by including a post-construction check.

Many conditions are worded so that they're fully signed off at design stage, which makes them easy to forget when work starts on site. So you could suggest to your local planning team that they use ours.

I'll also take the opportunity here to provide a quick summary of the relevant bits of the planning process, as there has been some incorrect information on Facebook and I expect elsewhere too. This applies to England, but the other nations are the same basic process.

The highest level planning policy document in England is the NPPF which sets policy that local authorities are told to follow in their Local Plan.

There has been some misunderstanding that the NPPF provides guidance for developers, but developers won't usually see this document - local authorities follow it but it's a slow process going through the Local Plan cycle of several years, although it is speeding up.

The slow turnaround of Local Plans and the lag between permission and construction is a major disadvantage of planning compared to building regulations, as it's often several years before results are seen on site.

Once building regulations are published, they apply immediately to any developments then starting on site.

The NPPG is the next level down - I've been made aware this now stands for National Planning Practice Guidance, rather than Policy Guidance as I've been calling it. Policy Guidance sounds better to me, and some sources still call it that, but that name was actually superseded well over 10 years ago.

The NPPG is guidance as the name suggests, but the government inspector can add it into Local Plans if the local authority fails to. Since June 2025, the NPPG has referred to "swift bricks" (at least one per dwelling on average for new developments).

The Local Plan and subsequently planning conditions should be legally binding for developers - but we know that compliance often falls short.

The recent Wild Justice report looked at landscaping plans and similar and found a low level of compliance - we don't have data on compliance for specific planning conditions, but Graham's work in Herts tells us this can be low too.

Liaising with the site manager can help a lot. Graham's the expert, any questions on this subject please send to swifts....@gmail.com and I'll pass on.

If non-compliance is reported (often by members of the public), then it becomes an enforcement issue. For "major" issues this can result in buildings being demolished and/ or rebuilt! But usually a compromise is found.

I've had good experience with enforcement teams and for me they've either forced retrofit of swift bricks or a greater number of swift boxes. Others have had less success due to either site circumstances or a less helpful enforcement team, which is frustrating.

So using the standard clause is a better option.

Any questions at all please let me know (questions to swifts....@gmail.com).

All the best,

Mike

Member of SLN Swifts & Planning Group

On 21 Oct 2025, at 21:25, Mike Priaulx <michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi all, I'm just letting you know that the standard planning condition created by the SLN Swifts & Planning Group is now in the SLN library (http://tinyurl.com/SLNlibrary ): ...

[Mike Priaulx]

Hi all,

We have slightly updated the standard planning condition which is available in the SLN library (http://tinyurl.com/SLNlibrary ):

* File name: Standard Planning Condition 29 03 2026

* Located in folder: Planning Process/ Planning Applications & Conditions

I've attached a Word copy for easy reference.

Some good news is that East Hertfordshire have started to use this condition! So this is a useful precedent.

The update is a subtle improvement to require evidence of installation before the external walls are complete, rather than before the roof is started.

In more detail:

This condition wording is aimed at reducing non-compliance by including a post-construction check.

Many conditions are worded so they're fully signed off at design stage, which makes them easy to forget when work starts on site. So you could suggest to your local planning team that they use ours.

Here's a reminder of the planning process if you're interested!:

The highest level planning policy document in England is the NPPF which sets policy that local authorities implement in their Local Plan (other UK countries have equivalents)

Developers won't usually even see the NPPF - local authorities do follow it but it's a slow process going through the Local Plan cycle of several years. In theory it also applies directly to planning applications, but that only happens in practice for the very largest developments.

The slow turnaround of Local Plans and the lag between permission and construction is a major disadvantage of planning compared to building regulations.

Once building regulations are published, they apply immediately to any developments starting on site.

The NPPG (National Planning Practice Guidance) is the next level down - the government inspector can add it into Local Plans if the local authority fails to. Since June 2025, the NPPG has referred to "swift bricks" (at least one per dwelling on average for new developments).

The Local Plan and subsequently planning conditions are legally binding for developers.

However, the recent Wild Justice report looked at landscaping plans and similar and found a low level of compliance - we don't have data on compliance for specific planning conditions, but Graham's work in Herts tells us this can be low too.

Liaising with the site manager can help a lot. Graham's the expert, any questions on this subject please send to swifts....@gmail.com and I'll pass on.

If non-compliance is reported (often by members of the public), then it becomes an enforcement issue - ultimately demolition is possible!

I've had good experience with enforcement teams and for me they've either forced retrofit of swift bricks or a greater number of swift boxes, but local teams can vary.

So using the standard clause is a better option.

Any questions at all please let me know (questions to swifts....@gmail.com).

All the best,

Mike

Member of SLN Swifts & Planning Group

On 27 Jan 2026, at 13:25, Mike Priaulx <michael...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hi all,