PART 1
(OPEN TO THE PUBLIC)
ITEM NO.
REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
TO THE LEAD MEMBER FOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 19TH AUGUST 2002
TO THE PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL 5th SEPTEMBER 2002
TITLE:
PLANNING POLICY STATEMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS : For the Development Services Lead Member and the Planning and
Transportation Regulatory Panel to note the contents of the report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY :
Following consultation on the Green Paper on Planning and complementary papers on national
infrastructure projects, planning obligations and compulsory purchase, the Government has made a
series of key decisions about how the proposals will be taken forward. The Government received
over 16,000 responses to the Green Paper – a measure of the importance of the issues.
The Government’s view on how now to proceed is summarised in a planning policy statement
“Sustainable Communities, Delivering through Planning” published by the office of the Deputy Prime
Minister in July 2002. It is accompanied by two supplementary papers: “Making the System Work
Better – Planning at Regional and Local Levels” and “ Compulsory Purchase Powers, Procedures and
Compensation – the Way Forward”.
Further announcements about elements of the changes proposed will be made in due course, and
guidance on matters referred to in the policy statement will also be issued. New primary legislation
will be required for specific proposals.
This report identifies the key issues for Salford: the policy statement itself (but not the supplementary
papers) is attached for information so that Lead Member is aware of the changes proposed in their
entirety.
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS : 1) Sustainable Communities, Delivering Through Planning
(July 2002)
(Available for public inspection) 2) Making the System Work Better - Planning at Regional and Local
Levels (July 2002)
3) Compulsory Purchase Powers Procedures and Compensation:
The Way Forward (July 2002)
ASSESSMENT OF RISK None
THE SOURCE OF FUNDING IS N/A
LEGAL ADVICE OBTAINED N/A
FINANCIAL ADVICE OBTAINED N/A
CONTACT OFFICER : Chris Findley Tel: 0161 793 3654
WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S) All
KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: UDP
c:\joan\specimen new report format.doc
1.0
National Concerns
1.1
The Government proposes to introduce a new statutory purpose for planning, to
review and reduce the volume of national guidance and to improve its own
performance. Significantly, following substantial opposition, the Government does
not now intend to proceed with the proposal for major infrastructure projects to be
determined through Parliamentary procedures. National policy statements about the
need for specific investment will be issued.
2.0
The Regional Level
2.1
Regional Planning Guidance will be replaced by Statutory Regional Spatial
Strategies. Clearly this is linked to the Governments wider regional agenda and the
prospect of elected assemblies particularly in the north of England. Interestingly the
role of the RDAs in strategic planning is also being enhanced. Structure Plans in the
counties will be abolished but, reflecting the strong concern of county councils that
this would leave them with little role in the planning system (outside minerals and
waste planning and LTP’s), the RSS will have a strong sub-regional element.
Provision is to be made for the counties to act as agents of the regional planning
bodies.
2.2
At a sub-regional level, it can be argued that the most important sub-regions in terms
of development and regeneration are the two metropolitan counties and their
hinterlands (North Cheshire and South Lancashire). AGMA would presumably have
to play its part in developing the sub-regional components of the RSS. What
resource would be required to undertake this effectively, and how this would work in
practical terms, is unclear.
3.0
Local Development Frameworks
3.1
There would be a single tier of Local Development Frameworks, in Salford eventually
replacing the UDP. It would comprise a folder including:-
a core strategy
a proposals section and map
area action plans for key areas of change or conservation
These elements can be produced and updated together or separately.
3.2
Importantly Councils will be required to produce a 3 year “Local Development
Framework Scheme” setting out the documents they propose to prepare for the LDF
and the timetable for preparing each one. Adherence to this will become a BVPI.
3.3
The timetable for producing the new LDF arrangements is currently unknown, as are
any transitional arrangements. It would be unwise to slow down our UDP Review
process in the interim period: the Government expect authorities to progress their
reviews of development plans under the existing arrangements as quickly as they
can, and will introduce a new BVPI for 2003/4 to cover this.
3.4
The LDF system may well represent an evolution of the current system rather than
the stated radical change. A great deal can be done under the present arrangements
to produce a plan that meets the Governments requirements for an LDF, and we
should seek to ensure that we do this. Part 1 of the Plan can contain the core
strategy, Part II can contain the proposals section, and we need to have SPG for
areas of major change / conservation. Indeed the requirements of regeneration,
including Central Salford and the Housing Market Renewal Fund, increasingly require
Area SPG to help direct physical development and protect the environment at the
local level. We can include a Statement of Community Engagement (required for the
LDF) in Part 1 of the Plan, and it may also be appropriate to develop a ‘Local
Development Framework Scheme’ in advance of the legislation and BVPI
implementation so that we get used to operating against it.
c:\joan\specimen new report format.doc
4.0
Land Assembly
4.1
The changes to the system of compulsory purchase and compensation have three
components: -
Strengthened powers, with a wider and more clearly defined power for a
planning authority to acquire land for the purpose of carrying out
development, redevelopment and improvement which it considers will be for
the economic, social and / or environmental benefit of the area.
-
Improved compensation arrangements for those for whom property is to be
acquired.
-
Measures to speed up procedures for confirming and implementing CPO’s.
4.2
There will be separate documents published and the Law Commission will be
publishing a consultative report on the law on compensation. In time, these changes
will assist the process of land assembly, but predictably there remains within the
system a balance between the interests of those acquiring land and those from
whom it is being taken, which will always make the process somewhat complex and
difficult.
5.0
Business Development Zones
5.1
This will be a flexible planning regime which can operate in growth areas and areas
of low growth or high unemployment. They will need to be planned in the regional
strategic interest but would be designated by local authorities. Parameters will be set
to ensure good quality environments are created, and EIAs will be required prior to
designation.
5.2
It is unclear how successful Business Development Zones might be, and in an area
such as Salford it is unlikely that designation would necessarily assist development.
Site assembly, site remediation and infrastructural provision are likely to be more
important factors in stimulating business investment than a “streamlined” planning
regime. Designating a site such as the Barton Strategic site as a Business
Development Zone may have some value in marketing terms, but care would need to
be taken that the parameters set to ensure good quality development were not so
tight and inflexible as to preclude appropriate investment.
6.0
Development Control
6.1
The changes to the system of development control trailed in the Green Paper are of
a largely administrative nature, and are retained. They will either have little impact
on the delivery of our service in Salford because we are using such mechanisms
already, or will provide us with an ability to improve our existing performance.
6.2
There has been much publicity around the Government’s abandonment of the
proposed ‘tariff’ system to replace the existing planning obligation regime. However
it is clear that the widely set objectives for the new regime are to be retained, and
that a system is to be introduced to help deliver those, which will require new
guidance and not legislative change. This new system will have important
implications for Salford.
6.3
A firm statement is made that the Government intends to continue with the 2002/03
target of delegating 90% of cases to officers, backed up by a BVPI.
6.4
A review of enforcement has been launched, and a consultation document will be
published shortly. Members of the Planning and Transportation Panel have been
very concerned about abuses of the current system, and will no doubt welcome the
c:\joan\specimen new report format.doc
Governments statement that enforcement attains a profile and priority, which is fully
in keeping with its central role.
7.0
Culture Change
7.1
The Government wants to see planning changing its culture from a reactive system
to one that plans positively for sustainable development, and “which is at the forefront
of creating better quality, more inclusive and sustainable places in which people can
live and work”. It has to be said that at Salford our planning approach attempts to be
positive, and measures which can assist us are to be welcomed.
7.2
The Government sees the Best Value system as a mechanism for driving culture
change, and it will continue to do this by tightening the targets for development
control and from 2003/4 by introducing an indicator to cover plan meeting (which
effectively will mean that Salford will have to have its Review UDP adopted by
2006/7). Intervention powers will be used against under-performing authorities with
the ultimate sanction of removing the planning function from the local authority.
7.3
A number of welcome “tools for the job” are being explored, and the Government is
keen to improve the training and education of planners, and the skills of members of
planning committees.
7.4
There has been a major debate over the last 12 months centred on the present major
under-funding of the planning system, with the level of resources put into planning
declining in real terms since 1996. This decline is reflected in Salford. In his
comprehensive spending review the Chancellor announced a significant injection of
extra resources into local authority planning services. A new planning delivery grant
is proposed worth £50m in 2003/04, £130M 2004/05 and £170M in 2005/06. Only
where planning authorities performance has already improved against BVPI’s, will
they be able to access grants from this resource, “and so authorities are now on
notice that they will have to sharpen up their performance”. A combination of longterm sickness, staff turnover/vacancies and an increase in the number / scale of
planning applications in the latter part of 2001/02 impacted on our BVPI performance
in early 2002/03. To receive the grant in 2003/04 we will need to address resource
issues impacting on our service immediately.
8.0
Conclusion
8.1
The proposals the Government sets out will be implemented on different timescales
as some require primary legislation, some require secondary legislation, although
many can be introduced in the shorter term through administrative action.
8.2
The Government regards the performance of the planning system as key to
economic productivity and community engagement. In Salford we have a good
record of being at the forefront of planning innovation. The planning agenda in
Salford is now massive, not only in terms of the statutory system (development
control, plan-making) which will be measured in BVPI’s, but equally in terms of the
non-statutory actions which are fundamental to achieving action on the ground. We
will need to review our planning resource and its structure to ensure it can deliver
improvements to the planning service both in terms of the Governments agenda, and
the expectations of Members and our communities.
Malcolm Sykes
Director of Development Services
c:\joan\specimen new report format.doc