Addendum for Executive	27 August 2020
Report of the Corporate Director of Economy and Place Portfolio of the Executive Member for Economy and Strategic Planning

Proposal for an Article 4 Direction for the Heslington Conservation Area

1. At the Development Plan Working Group meeting on 21 August 2020 Members resolved that further information should be provided to Executive on the costs of implementation and enforcement of the proposed Article 4 Direction and clarification of the number of properties affected by the withdrawal of permitted development rights for the installation of solar panels and how the impact of this aspect could be mitigated.

2. Table 1 records the Resolution and provides the Officers’ response with the information requested.

Table 1

Resolution no.	Officer response
ii) That an update be provided to the Executive meeting on the costs of implementing and enforcing the Direction	The only existing comparable Article 4 Direction in a Conservation Area in CoYC area is East Mount Road, which includes 47 dwellings. Development proposals covered by the Direction within a 10 year period (2010-2020) have resulted in 5 planning applications and 4 planning enforcement investigations. Were this to be replicated in Heslington (with up to 33% more dwellings) this would result in fewer than 7 planning applications and 5.5 enforcement investigations over a 10 year period, i.e. well under 1 of each p.a. However, it should be noted that there may be differences in the nature of the areas that result in a different balance of cases. In terms of enforcement, the team leader has commented “given the low numbers of dwellings involved and that the enforcement team has sustained a period of closing more cases than have been received for approximately 2 years, additional  cases in this region can be absorbed”. In both development management and enforcement terms, the proposed Article 4 Direction is anticipated to have a very low and manageable impact on costs and workloads.
ii) That officers provide further information on the number of properties affected by the Direction with regards to solar panels and how the effects of this restriction can be mitigated.	The optimal orientation for solar panels is facing south, followed by south-east and south-west. Of the approximately 70 dwellings covered by the proposed Direction, approximately 20 possess relevant-facing roof slopes with these orientations. Officers consider that the effects of any restriction on installing panels on these roof slopes could be mitigated by considering suitable alternative locations. Many of the affected dwellings have gardens, outbuildings or extensions to secondary elevations that would be unaffected by the Direction where panels could be mounted. Alternatively, energy-efficient technology such as air source heat pumps could be installed without planning permission (within the parameters of the General Permitted Development Order). Advice regarding such alternatives would be included in local guidance to be produced by DCSD, but guidance from the Government’s statutory adviser on the historic environment Historic England is available in the meantime (see for example https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/eehb-heat-pumps/heag172-heat-pumps/ and https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/eehb-solar-electric/heag173-eehb-solar-electric-photovoltaics/). Should householders submit planning applications or pre-application enquiries for the installation of solar panels, where proposals are considered likely to cause harm to the architectural or historic character and appearance of the conservation area Officers will advise applicants on alternative works which can be implemented that minimise or avoid harm or that can be carried out without planning permission.  Officers consider that as a consequence of the small number of dwellings with roofs suitable for the optimal installation of solar panels, and the availability in many cases of alternative solutions for improving energy efficiency and incorporating appropriate technology, the impact of the proposed Direction on climate change mitigation would be very low.

Edward Freedman, Conservation Officer

Design, Conservation & Sustainable Development