A representative from the Royal Town
Planning Institute (RTPI) will be attendance to provide information in relation
to the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Act 2023 to assist the Panel with the
current scrutiny investigation into Planning Capacity.
Recommendation: for the Panel to receive and note the information provided.
Minutes:
Richard Blyth, Head of Policy Practice and Research at the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) attended the meeting virtually and gave a presentation in relation to the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Act 2023 to assist the Panel with the current scrutiny investigation into Planning Capacity. Information was also provided in relation to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Local Plan-making.
The Levelling-Up and
Regeneration Bill
The Levelling-Up and Regeneration Bill was published in May 2022 and received Royal Assent in October 2023. Whilst a number of amendments were proposed during the Bill’s journey through Parliament, very few were conceded.
In addition to the impact of this new Act, it was highlighted that the Environment Act 2021 had also brought challenges to the planning system through the introduction of biodiversity net gain, which would be active from next month.
The Panel’s attention was drawn to the following elements of the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Act 2023:
• The Act brought in a requirement to prepare Environmental Outcomes Reports (EORs) which would replace the existing Strategic Impact Assessments (SIAs) and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and would be more streamlined. Environmental Assessments were currently quite broad and could include issues such as social and economic impact. However the EORs would be limited to environmental outcomes set by government ministers. This would be quite a change for planning applications and local plans.
• The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and much of the Section 106 payments system would be replaced with a new national infrastructure levy. Where and how infrastructure spending was allocated would be determined by local infrastructure delivery strategies.
• New Street Vote powers, would allow residents on a street to bring forward proposals to extend or redevelop their properties in line with their design preferences. So long as development rules and other statutory requirements were met, a referendum of residents would then be held to determine whether planning permission should be granted. It was unclear whether this would be permitted in conservation areas and likely that pilot schemes would be introduced in the first instance.
• National Development Management Policies (NDMPs) would be introduced which would, in future, have priority over Local Plans.
• There were proposals for two tier Council areas in England to co-operate more in planning terms which would be useful for the development of Local Plans.
On behalf of the UK planners, the RPTI had proposed an amendment to the Bill to bring in legislation that would allow Planning Committees to be held virtually. The temporary measure introduced during the Covid-19 Pandemic had been useful and enabled a greater variety of people to be involved in planning. Unfortunately the amendment had not been enacted.
The RPTI also wanted to strengthen the provision for climate action in the Bill and had supported a campaign to make it legally binding to build healthy homes.
National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF)
The Government had also proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The NPPF was a statement of policy rather than legislation. Proposed changes included:
• Local housing targets would become advisory and the need for Local Authorities to continually demonstrate a deliverable five year housing land supply would be removed.
• A greater emphasis on the need for social housing and housing for older people in planning decisions.
• Controversially, if a developer failed to build on planning permissions that they had, the planning authority would be able to use that factor as a material decision for future planning applications.
• Increased support for beauty in planning applications.
• Support for re-using wind turbines – ie replacing worn out blades without having to apply for planning permission again
• Appropriate incentives for communities to encourage them to agree to on-shore solar farms.
The consultation had closed at the beginning of March 2023 and the Government response was awaited within the next few weeks.
It was highlighted that where there were NDMPs, the NPPF would not be needed. The suite of national policies would be open to consultation next year.
Local Plans
In August 2023 the Government proposed new ideas to speed up the process for Local Plans. One of the current difficulties with the plan-making consultation was that it placed a great deal of information on process. The proposals did not give any detail about what resources would be brought into local plan making and there were no fees. There would be greater involvement from the Planning Inspectorate to ensure that Local Plans were fit for purpose on submission.
There were concerns from people in the sector around abolishing supplementary planning documents and replacing them with a plan that only related to design issues. As the local plan was replaced with the new style plan, any Supplementary Development Plans (SDPs) would effectively be abolished and replaced.
There was also the question of how to move from the current system of plan making to the new system. Clarification was needed as to at what stage within the local plan series of milestones, any Local Authority would have to turn back and start again under the new system.
Middlesbrough was currently in the process of renewing its local plan and it was important to press on towards completion to avoid being caught in the transitional process.
The RPTI had commissioned a study to look at reasons for delay to local plans and noted that uncertainty about the Government’s intentions was a really strong influence on delayed local plans.
With regard to Combined Authorities, it was apparent that if a Borough’s Local Plan already had a housing number to work to, provided by joint working across a wider area, that plan would proceed through the process more quickly because the overall amount of the plan did not have to be discussed in the local plan enquiry.
The plan making consultation had closed recently and it was unknown when the Government would produce a response.
The Chair thanked Richard Blyth for his presentation.
AGREED that the information provided was received and noted.