Authors
The UK Government has commenced a consultation on a proposed planning reform that ranks amongst the boldest that we have seen in decades.
Under the current system when a planning application is submitted to a local planning authority the most common method of determination is by a professional planning officer who evaluates the merits of the proposed development against the local planning policy, taking material considerations into account. Over ninety percent of decisions are made this way. The alternative to an officer’s decision, which is reserved for the larger and more controversial applications is a determination by the Council’s planning committee.
Planning committees are made up of elected councillors. Members will be invested in the local community. They are unlikely to be planning professionals and the majority will have been elected on a political party ticket. Committees operate according to the Council’s standing orders, which will have been adopted by the full Council. Members are required to adhere to the local Code of Conduct requiring, among other things, transparency in decision making.
The determination of a planning application will invariably involve the application of planning judgement, with the decision maker (be that the officer or the committee members) applying the weight they feel appropriate to the pros and cons of a development as they see them. This nuanced balancing exercise results in a binary outcome: reject or approve.
A perception in the development sector is that it is in the exercise of this planning judgement that some planning committees are able to hide their anti-development sentiments.
The government’s proposal is to reduce the number of planning decisions that are determined by the planning committee. The proposal is likely to require a statutory change to legislation including the Local Government Act 1972, with the imposition of England-wide standing orders on planning committees to supplant their existing local versions. The national standing order will likely set out the tests for when a local planning committee can call-in and determine an application. It is likely that the test will turn on the proposal’s compliance with the development plan, which in itself will require the performance of complex analysis by a planning officer. Alternative tests are proposed in the consultation, so it is really worth watching how this proposal develops.
As government consults and looks for the opportunity to add this change into its legislative program, developers will be looking forward to taking advantage of it. At this point in time the only lever they really have is one that they already will aspire to pulling: submit an application for a development that is designed to accord with the development plan.
Should you wish to discuss any of the issues raised in this article, please contact Mark Howard or Fergus Charlton.
Authors