Presumably, a question from a councillor with a domestic residence in close proximity to a proposed development site where the residence is listed on the declaration of interests form lodged with the MO?
So, the code of conduct + the Localism Act + Relevant Authorities Disclosable Pecuniary Interest Regs 2012 would require a domestic residence to be a declared DPI.
But the question would be - does the potential development represent an ‘interest?’
Only the individual can make the decision as to whether they should declare an interest or not but the personal judgement would be guided by the question - does the event under discussion have a markedly greater or lesser impact upon the Cllr when compared to any other member of the wider community. If it does, it’s likely that an interest should be declared.
“Apparently” the existence of a common boundary (and by extraction - proximity alone) would not, of itself, give rise to the existence of a interest but that it would require a tangible example of advantage or disadvantage to be shown for the interest to exist and therefore require the declaration.
It’s a tricky one since it can give rise to public criticism.