PlanningBlog – Brodies LLP

There used to be 2 things certain in life. Maybe we should include a third – planning reform. Well in truth it’s not certain yet with the small matter of an election ahead of us, and this time it’s the English system rather than Scotland in the frame. The Tories’ Green Paper on Open Source Planning was published last week calling for a “radical reboot” of the system down south. Unsurprisingly the overall theme was one of localism and sustainable development. Regional authorities, RSSs and LDFs all to go, with various measures being introduced to increase local engagement and democracy.

Some of the more notable proposals include: “flexible zoning” – unrestrained change of use in accordance with zonings in new Local Plans; third party right of appeal against local planning decisions, but appeal grounds limited to procedural issues, or breach of Local Plan; local planning authorities bound to grant applications in certain circumstances where the proposal accords with the Local Plan (goodbye material considerations?), and abolition of the long awaited CIL to be replaced by a local tariff system applicable to all development at graded rates, keeping s. 106 agreements for site specific planning gain.

Reversing the usual trend, some proposals looked to Scotland for inspiration. A national planning framework is to be introduced, and the plethora of PPSs is to be reviewed and streamlined – all sounding familiar. Local review bodies were nowhere to be seen….

In an attempt to give some certainty to developers of major infrastructure, the Green Paper confirmed the Tories’ intention to abolish the newly born IPC. For the majority of projects, responsibility would instead pass to (wait for it) the MIU or Major Infrastructure Unit to be created alongside the Planning Inspectorate. While the fast-track process of the IPC would be retained, applications would be assessed by senior inspectors, reporting to the Secretary of State, for the final decision.

However “very major” linear projects, such as HS2, would be dealt with separately under revised procedures for private or hybrid bills “to allow these projects to be approved more simply and directly by Parliament”. Given the problems which led to the creation of the IPC in the first place the thinking behind this distinction is not entirely clear…. Of course if HS2 is to make it over the border, the IPC would have had no jurisdiction in respect of the Scottish section anyway.

For those of us still grappling with planning reform in Scotland, it’s nice to think we’re not alone. But don’t get too comfortable…. I bet we won’t have heard the last of some of this.