What would you do?

1. Change the way councils are incentivised

Councils receive something called a Planning Delivery Grant, determined in part by whether they deliver decisions within the statutory period – eight or 13 weeks depending on the project. Sounds like a good idea, but in practice it is a source of endless frustration for applicants.

Benfield explains: ‘If the planners are under pressure, as they all are, they either put it to committee and get a rejection, or say it’s incomplete and is not a valid application.’ That way, a decision has been made and the grant is paid. The developer must then resubmit the whole thing and wait another eight weeks. The council gives another answer and statistically, it looks like it has handled two applications within the time frame.

Contrast this with what happened in the past when developer and planner would sit down to negotiate changes to the scheme. This might mean that a scheme took, say, 12 weeks rather than eight to go through.

What the White Paper says: The Planning Delivery Grant will continue, but the way it is incentivised will change.

2. More consistency

When the South East Centre for the Built Environment (SECBE) carried out a survey of the 74 local authorities within its area (and that excludes London) it discovered 74 different sets of requirements.

‘The overarching theme was the lack of consistency around the region in a variety of issues,’ says SECBE’s planning project manager Lisa Kember. ‘Some local authorities might be developing policy with respect to sustainability, others aren’t. It’s very difficult for developers to keep track of all the changes.’

What the White Paper says: A standard application form and associated guidance will be introduced for all authorities.

3. More certainty

Lodging a planning application is complex. On top of the basics, you may need to provide flood risk assessments, traffic surveys, economic assessments, tree reports, ground investigations… the list goes on.

These reports don’t come cheap. Consultants can charge up to £5,000 per document. Amos says that he often has to tell clients to set a budget of £20,000-£50,000. Having spent all that extra time and money, the risk of rejection is still high. Also, different planners ask for different things, even within the same authority. Or it may be that when the scheme gets to the planning committee, with a recommendation to accept it, the councillors say no.

Then there’s the problem of changing requirements. Councils sometimes adopt new strategies, such as the proportion of affordable homes or renewable energy, they require. Benfield reports that even consultants specialising in planning can fail to keep up.

What the White Paper says: It suggests the introduction of planning performance agreements which set out what information the council needs and when things will be dealt with.

4. More power to the planners

This is contentious. Elected councillors have the final say on whether schemes get approval, which is what makes our planning system democratic. However, it’s also a major source of frustration when they ignore the advice of professional planners.

Councils can delegate powers to planners, which they will typically allow for small uncontentious domestic schemes. But should these powers go further, allowing planners to take decisions within agreed guidelines?

West believes they should: ‘I would try to find a way of minimising political influence on decision-making so that once a policy has been set within a development framework, it brings with it a higher level of certainty for the developer and is less capable of being diverted by a political whim.’

What the White Paper says: The new approach which could allow domestic schemes to go ahead with agreement from neighbours could be extended to other forms of development.

5. Give the councillors a chance

It’s fair to say that some pretty uncomplimentary things have been said about planning committees. But if you ask a group of laypeople, who are working as councillors in their spare time, with no formal training, to take decision on something as complex as planning, you are likely to get some strange answers.

‘It’s frustrating to go to planning committee and have some of the arguments put forward which are spurious,’ says Amos. He recalls one scheme in Kent where flooding was an issue. Discussions centred not on global warming or rising sea levels but on whether a Tsunami would hit the area.

Seal believes that the system would be vastly improved if councillors were involved at the beginning of the process. He suggests a developer pay for pre-consultation with a council member to discuss issues in advance of an application being made, with the fee being deducted from the main application cost.

What the White Paper says: The government will create an independent infrastructure planning commission to decide on nationally significant infrastructure cases.

6. Sort out Section 106 agreements

No one seemed very keen on the idea of a Planning Gain Supplement (PGS), which was proposed by the government to replace section 106 agreements, under which developers negotiate with planners over what they will provide towards local infrastructure, such as schools and roads, if planning permission is granted.

One objection was that a proportion would go into a central government pot to pay for regional infrastructure, another that the PGS is determined by the value of the land at the time of application and that can change depending on any number of factors.

Section 106 Agreements aren’t perfect and have been described by some as ‘a bit of a lottery’, another uncertainty impacting on the viability of a development. Many support a different approach, such as Milton Keynes’ roof tax, whereby developers pay £18,500 per house, which the council worked out by calculating the infrastructure needed over the next 18 months. Other authorities have similar systems.

What the white paper says: Discussions ongoing. If PGS is introduced it will be no earlier than 2009.

7. Move domestic cases out of the system

A huge amount of planners’ time is spent dealing with extensions and loft conversions. Amos describes this as ‘a production-line process’. Most of the people we talked to agreed that removing these from the system would free up time for the planners to concentrate on the more complex applications.

‘The Planning Officers’ Society has been arguing this case for years,’ says Hackforth, who adds that a conflict resolution system for neighbours would be required.

What the white paper says: Householders and businesses will have freedom to carry out extensions or install renewable energy sources such as solar panels without having to make a planning application.

8. Stop the brain drain to the private sector

Faced with the prospect of piles of extension schemes, poor pay, irate developers and a planning committee that ignores your recommendations what would you do? Move to the private sector of course.

‘A lot of the best planners are going out into private practice, certainly in the last two years. We’ve managed to strike up a relationship with planners and then they’ve left to work in the private sector,’ says one housebuilder who didn’t want to be named.

‘That means we are frequently dealing with a recently qualified, relatively inexperienced planner.’

There is hope that by removing domestic schemes from the planners’ lot, their jobs may become more challenging. Amos, who himself moved recently from the public to private sector, talks of the frustration of becoming ‘a sausage machine’ – as well as the pitiful paypacket.

What the White Paper says: Bursaries are being provided for 400 post-graduate students to study planning.

9 End the grey area between planning and building control

You may have thought that the energy efficiency of a scheme would be guided by Part L of the Building Regulations, which in turn comes under Building Control. But the drive towards sustainability means that planners are now calling the tune on some issues – some may insist that a certain level of the Code for Sustainable Homes is met, for example. So a national housebuilder can no longer rely on a standard house type being accepted everywhere.

‘They are trying to drive energy efficiency and sustainable issues through the planning system,’ says Benfield. ‘It should be a Building Control issue.’

Some, including Ian Abley in CM’s April issue, have suggested that planning and Building Control should be merged, but most people CM spoke were against this idea.

What the White Paper says: The trend won’t reverse. The paper’s title is Planning for a Sustainable Future.

10 Build family homes on greenfield sites

Benfield predicts a backlash from home buyers against the apartments dictated by the government’s high-density requirements. Where, he asks, will young families live?

‘We are changing the culture of society by what we are able to build. We are in danger of creating slums again,’ warns Benfield. ‘We do need to be developing greenfield sites as well.

‘I always used to think what I built I would be very happy to live in, but not anymore.’

Hackforth comments: ‘I think that housing needs for the south east require that we look at other options and that should include whether some green belt releases are appropriate. I am not suggesting for one minute that we devalue the green belt policy, but the problems are so great that I don’t think it can be treated as an absolute constraint anymore.’

What the White Paper says: Policy on the green belt remains unchanged: only in exceptional circumstances.

11. Speed up planmaking system

The government’s 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act was intended to streamline the planmaking system. It isn’t working.

Local strategies are often out of kilter with regional ones, for example requiring less housing to be built.

Each local authority was meant to produce a core strategy, but few of these have been accepted. ‘We need to speed up the new system for developing frameworks. It has become extremely cumbersome and needs to be made fit for purpose,’ says Hackforth.

What the White Paper says: Simplified routes to local development frameworks to be introduced.