News (click on headline to read full story)
Planning applications: A faster and more responsive system - Further recommendations
13th January 2009
Last month this website outlined a number of changes set out in the Government commissioned Killian Pretty Review of the Planning System. The Final Report was published in November 2008 and I have outlined a number of the further recommendations below as these are likely to affect applicants and other users of the planning system as well as local planning authorities.
Recommendation 6 considers the approach to the treatment of planning conditions, a procedure that has already recently changed in terms of the procedures adopted by Councils in dealing with applications to discharge conditions. The Review encourages Councils to avoid imposing unnecessary conditions in response to the finding that conditions are now being attached to more planning permissions than in the past. The measures that are proposed, together with Recommendation 4 detailed in last month’s website update on pre-application discussions, are intended to result in the need for fewer conditions; reduced demands on local planning authority resources; and reduced delays associated with the discharge of conditions.
Recommendation 7 sets out measures to improve the negotiation and agreement of planning obligations in response to a one-off CLG survey that indicated that these so-called section 106 agreements are responsible for at least 50% of the delays that can occur with processing major developments.
Some changes will follow from the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) as proposed in the Planning Bill but the Review also recommends addressing and agreeing issues that would need to be covered by planning obligations much earlier in the process, at pre-application stage as well as the greater use of standard agreements and clauses.
Recommendation 8 proposes that a way is found to avoid the need for a new full application for planning permission to deal with a small, but material change to an existing permission. The need for such an arrangement might arise, for example, where it becomes apparent that it is necessary to change the location of a building on a major development by a small distance, but where such a change would have no discernable impact on a third party or other interest of acknowledged importance, although it would constitute a material change to the approved scheme. This recommendation is likely to require primary legislation, but would allow a more proportionate approach to be taken for small changes, a move that would be welcomed by all those involved in the planning process.
Planning applications: A faster and more responsive system - Further recommendations
13th January 2009
The next four recommendations address three key areas where engagement with third parties needs to be improved, namely in relation to statutory and non-statutory consultees, elected members, and the wider community. These measures therefore centre on the role of local planning authorities and the involvement of statutory and non-statutory consultees and clarification over tighter timescales for their responses. Possibly as coming as no surprise, the Killian Pretty Review also presents evidence demonstrating considerable over-consultation on some issues (for example, one local planning authority was able to reduce the percentage of applications sent to the local highway authority for consultation by 50% through the introduction of clearer guidelines over the need for consultation). Recommendation 10 sets out measures to improve the engagement of elected members. Of particular interest, one objective is to make absolutely clear that councillors can take part in pre-application discussions, provided these are conducted according to a clear and well structured format. The recommendation also encourages delegation rates of at least 90% in every council.
Recommendation 11 sets out measures to improve the engagement of the local community whilst Recommendation 12 sets out measures to encourage greater use of alternative dispute resolution approaches throughout the process and proposes further study into the potential benefits of formal mediation as an alternative to appeal or to resolve issues within an appeal.
A final news item on the Review will appear shortly on this website.
Planning applications: A faster and more responsive system - Final Report
8th December 2008
Killian Pretty Review of the Planning System (24th. November 2008)
The Government’s most recent review of the operation of the planning system has just been published. It aimed to review, from start to finish, the process for seeking planning permission with the aim of identifying reasons for delay in deciding planning applications.
A number of recommendations for dealing with delays and reducing unnecessary burdens for all parties involved in the process and a summary of the first five of these is outlined below.
The final report sets out 17 main recommendations. These are grouped into a number of key themes:
The process is made more proportionate with more permitted development and streamlined processes for small scale development and streamlined information requirements where full planning permission is required;
The process is improved particularly in relation to pre-application and post decision stages, where some significant problems currently exist;
Engagement is made more effective by improvements in the way elected members, statutory and non statutory consultees and the wider community are involved in the process;
Changes in culture are encouraged by replacing time-based performance targets with a measure of customer satisfaction and by seeking ways to reward better quality applications; and
Unnecessary complexity is removed by making the national policy and legislative framework clearer, simpler and more proportionate.
Recommendation 1 sets out measures for expanding the scope of permitted development for non householder development, for revising and expanding the existing simpler consenting system (known as prior approval) to make obtaining planning permission simpler for a further 16,500 minor commercial development, including changes to shopfronts and automated teller machines and measures to encourage the use of Local Development Orders and to discourage the restriction of permitted development rights.
Recommendation 2 sets out measures to considerably reduce information and validation requirements, particularly for householder and minor developments, including a revised and more proportionate approach to Design and Access Statements; better guidance on the provision of drawings; and substantial changes to the way local lists are drawn up.
Planning applications: A faster and more responsive system - Final Report
8th December 2008
This recommendation is of particular interest as it is intended to reduce the burden on applicants from having to provide unnecessary information, and reduce the numbers of applications previously considered to be invalid, thereby
reducing the burdens on local planning authorities and speeding up the processing of applications.
Recommendation 3 proposes a range of measures to improve the quality of advice available to users of the planning system, particularly from the Planning Portal and Planning Advisory Service.
Recommendation 4 sets out a range of improvements to pre-application discussions, including stronger and clearer national policy and guidance, incorporating improvements needed in use of resources, record keeping and consistency of advice; a strong presumption that, for major developments, there will be formal pre-application discussions involving, where appropriate, all relevant parties, including elected members, statutory consultees and representatives of the local community; greater encouragement of the use of Planning Performance Agreements for major applications; better incentives, through revisions to the performance targets; and a more consistent approach to charging.
Recommendation 5 supports continuing improvements to the processing of applications, more details of which will be published next month on the website.
It is of course important that local Councils follow up and address the concerns identified in the Killian Pretty Review although it will also be noted that many of the actions are the responsibility of central Government and its agencies rather than directly in the control of Local Planning Authorities. Nonetheless, Local Planning Authorities will be expected to implement the changes in their control and these will be considered further on this website.
