The Deputy Prime Ministers step-change in the planning process is currently being fast tracked through Parliament with Royal Assent intended by the summer. The first two readings have taken place and the Standing Committee stage has just concluded whereby a detailed clause-by-clause analysis took place and where a number of HBF issues were raised. At present, we are awaiting the announcement of dates for the report stage - which is an opportunity for members not serving on the standing committee to propose further amendments or new clauses to the bill and another opportunity for the HBF to influence the decision making process.
During the short time the Bill has been going through the various stages, the HBF has been active on a number of issues. We have sought advice from Masons, a firm of solicitors and input from members, which enabled us to go through the Bill line by line and suggest pertinent amendments.
During the Standing Committee stage, a number of our arguments were raised. The first was planning for current and future housing need part 1. The Bill does not address the critical question of how a Regional Spatial Strategy will distribute housing requirements to each individual district within the region.
HBF is seeking assurances that this major gap in the new system will be filled with strong guidance to local authorities on how to undertake sub-regional planning. Sub-regional planning guidance should be a statutory part of the planning system to ensure that there is widespread commitment to meeting housing requirements.
The abolition of outline planning consent is also an area where the HBF is seeking an amendment. The Bill proposes to allow an applicant to seek a statement of development principles, a time limited certificate that gives agreement in principle for a developer to work up detailed scheme within set parameters. The new procedures will supplement outline consent but allow for this new process to eventually replace outline planning permission.
Outline planning consent provides the certainty needed by developers to secure the necessary investment for new housing developments. Investment extends well beyond the obvious financing of developments themselves and extends to much wider investment in infrastructure and communities. This certainty is particularly important on the most difficult brownfield or regeneration sites where the risk to developers is high. The current system works well and the industry can see no valid reason for change.
Another area of concern is the abolition of twin tracking and repeat applications. Existing legislation to allow local planning authorities to refuse to determine similar or repeated planning applications will be extended in an attempt to avoid twin tracking.
The Government accepts that the planning performance of many local authorities is poor. Targets for determining planning applications are met by a minority of authorities. Twin tracking of applicants is of vital importance to developers who have large sums of money invested in sites. The use of the appeals systems is the only accessible sanction that a developer has against a poor performing planning authority that fails to determine a planning application.
Finally a reduction in the length of planning permission time limits from five to three years, also give us cause for concern. The majority of applications for development are implemented within 3 years of a permission being granted. However, there are a significant number of application for residential development, particularly those on complex, brownfield sites, that take some time to implement due to requirements to decontaminate land or put together complex funding streams, including those to provide affordable housing.
This is especially the case with regard to applications that are taken to judicial review by third parties. Legal proceedings can take a considerable period of time yet even where the permission is upheld, the time period for implementation remains as of the date permission was granted. The HBF strongly believes that the default time for applications should remain at 5 years, or that the Bill should, at the very least, address this concern by effectively stopping the clock on applications subject to such delays.
The HBF will continue to contribute to the debate in order to assist in the formulation of robust and workable legislation that best serves the needs and objectives of all parties.