Full Council
18 April 2012
Agenda Item No_______12_____
Introduction of Fees for Pre-application Advice and “Do I need Planning Permission?”
Enquiries
Summary:
Conclusions:
Recommendations:
This report seeks authority for the adoption of a schedule of charges
covering pre-application advice and “Do I need planning permission?”
enquiries
That the Council adopts these proposals with effect from 1 May
2012, subject, in the case of major applications, to half of the fees
paid at pre-application stage being used to offset the formal
application fee.
Cabinet member(s):
Ward(s) affected:
Keith Johnson
All
Contact Officer, telephone number,
and e-mail:
Steve Oxenham, 01263 516135
Steve.oxenham@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
Introduction
1.1
At its meeting on 22 February 2012 the Council adopted the annual budget for 2012/13.
Amongst its provisions is the inclusion of income-generating proposals of £10,000 and
£5,000 respectively relating to the introduction of fees for pre-application advice and “Do
I need Planning Permission?” enquiries which are currently provided free at the point of
delivery. This report suggests principles and attaches a proposed Schedule of Fees at
Appendix A for introduction on 1 May.
1.2
These proposals were considered by Cabinet on 12 March 2012 which recommended
their adoption following consultation with local agents, the development industry and
Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and the consideration of the outcome thereof by the
Corporate Director and the Head of Planning & Building Control in consultation with the
Portfolio Holder.
1.3
At its meeting on 28 March Overview & Scrutiny Committee confirmed that it had no
objection in principle to the proposals, that it was anxious to ensure that the service had
the resource to implement them and that they should be the subject of review in January
2013, i.e. following at least 6 months’ experience from implementation. A summary of
the consultation responses is set out in paragraphs 4.7, 5.3 & 6.2 below.
Full Council
18 April 2012
2.
Background
2.1
Approximately 440 formal pre-application enquiries are received per year, and some 320
“Do I need planning permission?” enquiries are also received annually. In addition, Duty
Planning Officers who operate on 5 half-days each week receive approximately 2,000
enquiries per annum, an average of 8 per session. Experience from a local authority in
Lincolnshire which introduced charges last year is that pre-application enquiries were
reduced to between 25-30% of those which had previously been received when the
service was free to users. If these figures are applied to North Norfolk we can be
reasonably confident that the budgetary target can be met, although the degree of
customer resistance to the proposals is not yet known.
3.
Principles of the Service
3.1
It is proposed that the scheme should be as simple as possible to administer, and seen
to be fair and easy for the public to understand. In the absence of any decision by the
Government to allow local fee-setting, it is suggested that the national fee scheme be
used as the basis for charging for pre-application enquiries. This is a well-established
and understood structure, and it has been used as the basis for the introduction of
similar charges last year by Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council, so it will be
understood by a number of local agents.
3.2
It is also suggested that the pre-application fee be based on approximately 30% of the
national fee, rounded for ease of administration and with a minimum charge of £50 to
help meet administrative costs. It is also proposed that the same exemptions apply to
this service as are applied nationally, thus reducing the scope for local disputes over
“special cases”.
3.3
A draft schedule of fees is attached for consideration at Appendix A.
4.
The service offered
4.1
Clearly, if charges are to be levied for this service it is important that public expectations
of a good level of service are met. These should be set out clearly and monitored in
order to ensure that standards are maintained.
4.2
It is proposed that the following principles be applied.
4.3
The pre-application enquiry will be registered and an acknowledgement sent confirming
either that more information is required or that the enquiry has been registered and a
date specifying when a response will be provided, including details of the case officer,
and consultations where appropriate will be dispatched, all within 5 working days. For all
major developments a meeting with Officers will be offered within the period for
response, to which consultees will be invited in appropriate cases.
4.4
A full written response will be sent within 30 working days of registration unless another
timescale has been agreed between the parties. (It will be noted that the District Council
has no ability to control response times from consultees and therefore their advice may
have to follow the principal response).
4.5
The Council’s advice will cover the following items; the requirements to allow a valid
application to be registered, including the statutory fee required; a synopsis of the
Full Council
18 April 2012
planning history of the site; details of any statutory designations and constraints affecting
the site; the relevant planning policy context and assessment of the scheme against
planning policy; and an assessment identifying any other material considerations;
potential developer contributions; a summary of consultee responses; a synopsis of the
potential changes which may be required to improve the scheme and, if possible,
overcome objections; and an indication of the likely recommendation of Officers, making
it clear that this is without prejudice as to the final decision that the Council may wish to
make.
4.6
Once the regime is in place, Officers will give equal priority to pre-applications and
formally submitted applications; this may have implications for speed of determination of
the latter, depending on workload and resources available.
4.7
Consultation Comments.
The proposals were discussed at the quarterly meeting of Planning & Building Control
Agents in March, when a number of issues were clarified. One agent expressed concern
about the amount of money payable in advance and expressed a preference for a
negotiable scheme.
Some 56 agents, 17 local and regional developers and the North Norfolk Business
Forum were consulted in writing. Five individual responses have been received, three
from individual agents, one representing a major local housebuilder and one
representing North Norfolk Business Forum. Copies of these responses are available for
inspection in the Members’ Room.
All consultation responses supported the principle of pre-application discussions, but
only one of the consultees was broadly supportive of these proposals. All raised
divergent views as to the most appropriate means of pre-application engagement.
However, the key issues raised are considered to be as follows:•
The proposals will lead to more submissions without discussion, generating scope
for disagreement and delays.
•
Large pre-application fees could be financially damaging to the viability of major
schemes. The costs are significant in the context of other costs for major developers
and should be related to the actual time spent.
•
No offset is proposed towards the formal fee; it would be better to increase the
formal fee and leave the advice free.
•
There is no control over consultee responses; this is a concern in relation to timing
and delays.
•
It may lead to clients going direct to Officers on duty or by phone, increasing
pressure on them.
•
It may lead to adverse public relations for the Council.
•
It may increase pressure on staff because of the response timescales proposed.
•
The emphasis should be on fees for smaller schemes to discourage “timewasters”.
•
Small income expected is not balanced against the costs of operating the scheme.
Full Council
4.8
18 April 2012
•
It is not worth collecting fees as low as £50.
•
The proposed scheme is not simple.
•
The loss of “weeded out” schemes denies Officers the opportunity to improve them.
•
This would be a bureaucratic brake on development and smaller schemes would not
come forward in a timely manner or at all.
•
The written response should carry material weight.
•
A formal written response would leave the Council’s hands subsequently tied.
•
Fees should be confined to large and complex schemes.
•
Electronic submission should be the subject of additional copying charges.
•
As an alternative it would be better to attract additional work based on existing fees,
thus encouraging developers to do business in North Norfolk.
Officers’ Comments
There is understandably a reluctance on the part of the development industry to pay for
a service which is currently provided free at the point of delivery and there are also
conflicting views as to the most appropriate way of levying fees for this work. However,
the decision to levy fees has already been taken by the Council and it is therefore
considered necessary to select a means of doing so which best fits the Council’s
corporate priorities.
Since the delivery of new homes and economic development projects is a particularly
high priority, and taking into account the potentially large fees involved, it is suggested,
in order to mitigate the impact on the delivery of major schemes and to encourage
developers to progress their schemes to formal application stage, that for major
applications (as defined by DCLG Regulations) half of the pre-application fee be used to
offset the statutory fee payable at application stage.
The proposals are likely to lead to increased pressures on staff and their impact will
need to be monitored carefully and kept under review. Set against this, it is likely that
pre-application workloads will reduce since some prospective applicants will be deterred
by the prospect of paying.
It is considered that the proposed scheme, being based on the national system, is as
simple as possible to implement and it is not accepted that a £50 fee is too small to be
worth collecting; some national fees already collected are as low as £25.
A benefit of the scheme is considered to be that Officers’ advice will be on the record
and therefore should give confidence to developers, without compromising the ability of
elected Members to determine the outcome of subsequent applications.
Subject to the significant modification proposed above, it is recommended that the
scheme be adopted for pre-application charges.
Full Council
18 April 2012
5.
“Do I need Planning Permission?” Enquiries
5.1
There is a formal process by which applicants may apply for a Lawful Development
Certificate for a proposed use of buildings of land or operational development. The
statutory fee for this is half that for an equivalent planning application; thus for
householder applications this will be £75. It is proposed that a flat-rate fee of £50 be set
for all such enquiries, again making it clear that this represents the Officer’s professional
opinion but does not bind the Authority to a formal determination. Since fees are not
levied for Listed Building or Conservation Area consent applications it is proposed that
no fee is charged for enquiries of this type.
5.2
It is proposed to maintain the Duty Officer system as currently operated so that members
of the public will continue to receive a limited service free of charge, although the
pressure on this service is likely to increase significantly with the advent of charges and
this workload will therefore need to be monitored. Potential applicants will also be
signposted to the Council’s website and to the Planning Portal to which it is linked which
enables applicants to obtain free advice as to the need for permission via the web.
5.3
Consultation Comments
One respondent commented that there should be no charges for private householders
under any circumstances.
5.4
Officers’ Response
Comment noted but at present this service is subsidised by Council taxpayers and
sources of free informal advice will continue to be publicised.
6.
Planning Performance Agreements
6.1
Officers have drafted a paper which was the subject of consultation on Planning
Performance Agreements, a copy of which is attached at Appendix B. Subject to the
submission of a fee, a programme timetable would be drawn up for the consideration of
a proposal at pre-application and application stage. The paper sets out the proposed
commitments of the Council under this scheme and the responsibilities of developers.
6.2
Consultation Comments
Two of the consultees responded on this issue. One expressed the view that Planning
Performance Agreements should not be allowed to become a reason for slower progress
with applications where there is no Agreement. The other commented that the
proposals appeared to suggest without special consultation between the parties a
substandard service could be expected; a PPA is something which the Planning
Authority could offer without a specific charge.
6.3
Officers’ Response
It is proposed that Officers give further consideration to the issue of Planning
Performance Agreements and develop a Planning Performance Charter for subsequent
consideration by the Council.
Full Council
18 April 2012
7.
Financial Implications
7.1
It is intended that this initiative will lead to an increase in income of at least £15,000 per
annum. The additional projected income levels will be monitored as part of the regular
budget monitoring process and any issues regarding income levels will be flagged as
appropriate within these reports. The income levels generated and the success of the
scheme will be explored as part of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee review process
in January 2013.
8.
Risks
8.1
Customer resistance to these proposals is not known, but the experience of another
Local Authority which recently introduced similar charges has been used in their
preparation.
8.2
There is a risk that the charges will provide a disincentive to developers from entering
into pre-application discussions with Planning Officers; this could mean that the
programme of implementing major development residential allocations and other
economically valuable development could be adversely affected, in conflict with key
elements of the Council’s Corporate Plan.
8.3
There is also a risk that applicants may seek to develop without checking whether
planning permission is required which could lead to an increase in potential enforcement
cases.
8.4
These risks are to an extent mitigated by the fact that following consultation it is
suggested that the proposals be amended to enable half of pre-application fees for
major developments to be offset against the statutory fee payable upon submission of a
formal application. Furthermore, limited free pre-application advice will still be available
from Duty Planning Officers and via the website. A large number of Local Planning
Authorities also currently charge for pre-application advice.
9.
Sustainability
9.1
These proposals are not considered to have any impact on the Council’s sustainability
agenda.
10.
Equality and Diversity
10.1
The proposals take a similar position with regard to equality and diversity as do the
national statutory planning fee regulations.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council adopts these proposals with effect from 1 May 2012, subject
in the case of major applications, to half of fees paid at pre-application stage being used to
offset the formal planning application fee.