Memorandum by North West Regional Review
(PGP 67)
"PLANNING: DELIVERING A FUNDAMENTAL
CHANGE"—DTLR GREEN PAPER
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Regional Review's principal purpose
is to develop working relationships between the North West Regional
Assembly, North West Development Agency and Government Office
North West; and scrutinise the Agency's plans and policies with
the aim of facilitating improved performance in relation to the
implementation of the Regional Strategy and assisting the process
of regional consultation and accountability in accordance with
the Regional Development Agencies Act 1998. The Group also acts
as a think tank to explore ideas collectively for improving the
North West's regional economic performance, image and quality
of life. The Group includes representatives of each of the three
aforementioned bodies and is chaired by a senior business partner.
1.2 On Monday 4 March, the Regional Review
held a "select committee" style hearing on the Planning
Green Paper. The day consisted of a series of short presentations
followed by questions and answers sessions. The following is a
summary of the discussions and conclusions.
2. GENERAL COMMENTS
2.1 There was general agreement with the
need to review the existing planning system which was felt to
be too complicated and cumbersome and not inclusive enough. There
was also agreement with the Government's objectives of speeding
up decision making, greater transparency in the system and better
community engagement. In particular, in the North West of England
the aim must be to provide a planning system that assists and
facilitates sustainable investment in the region and helps to
address the needs of deprived urban and rural communities.
2.2 However, during the session, a number
of concerns were expressed which it is felt the Government needs
to address:
— Achieving sustainable development
is a key Government objective yet there is little mention of sustainability
in the Green Paper, apart from the daughter document on Planning
obligations. The Local Government Act 2000 and the Draft Guidance
on Community Strategies places a duty on local authorities to
deliver sustainable development. The need to make development
sustainable should also be embodied in the planning system.
— Whilst there is a great emphasis
placed on the speed of decision making in the Green Paper, there
was concern about the lack of emphasis either on the quality of
development or in the decision making process.
— The proposed simplification and understandability
of the system is welcomed, particularly the two tier approach
at regional and local level. However, the Green Paper is short
on process and did not convince everyone that the two-tier system
could be genuinely achieved. There remains the potential for the
same complexity and delay that occurs with the present system.
— The need for genuine community involvement
was welcomed but this must embrace all sectors of the community,
including the business community. However, discussions centred
on the need to achieve the right balance between an appropriate
level of involvement and avoidance of delay.
— There was also real concern that
whatever change is made to the planning system, it will not be
effective unless the system is properly resourced. This is one
of the major causes of delay at present and local authorities
and other organisations will need to be adequately staffed to
deliver the proposed system. There is already difficulty in attracting
people into the planning profession and this needs to be urgently
addressed.
— Concerns were expressed about delays
throughout the present system being caused by the Government and
the Secretary of State from issuing Regional Planning Guidance
to decisions on individual planning applications.
3. NATIONAL LEVEL
3.1 Most people recognised and welcomed
the need to review national planning guidance and to separate
out policy and advice on PPG's and MPG's and in particular the
ability for greater flexibility of interpretation at regional
level. However, it was considered important that guidance remains
sufficiently prescriptive to aid decision-making and that the
review needs to be carried out as quickly as possible.
3.2 However, there was a unanimous view
that this review on its own is inadequate for setting national
policy and that there is a clear need for a national spatial strategy
to address issues of regional disparities, national infrastructure
investment and address development choices between regions. The
preparation of such a strategy would move closer to the systems
in other parts of the UK and Europe and would assist in addressing
major cross boundary and transnational issues.
4. REGIONAL LEVEL
4.1 The approach to the preparation of Regional
Spatial Strategies (RSS) which clearly addressed regional priorities
and assumed statutory status was endorsed, but the Regional Review
felt that there were still a number of issues which needed to
be addressed. In particular:
— The need for greater clarity as to
how various topics will be addressed between the regional and
sub-regional levels.
— The relationship with and the need
to avoid conflict with other regional and sub-regional strategies,
particularly the Development Agency's regional economic strategy
and local transport plans. As far as the latter were concerned
it was felt there needed to be more positive links with transport
in the Green Paper.
— How to ensure genuine and comprehensive
stakeholder and community involvement in the process and at the
same time to resolve conflicts and make the necessary hard choices
required for an effective RSS.
5. SUB-REGIONAL
LEVEL
5.1 There was considerable discussion and
considerable uncertainty about the Green paper's approach to planning
at the sub-regional level:
— Some felt the Green Paper's proposals
for sub-regional strategies based on a small number of areas such
as the conurbations was appropriate, whilst an alternative proposal
was put forward which involved the preparation of comprehensive
sub-regional "Integrated Development frameworks" based
on existing county and unitary authorities. There was clearly
no agreed approach for sub-regions from the Group.
— There were mixed views about the
abolition of structure plans which some felt adequately carried
out the sub-regional role.
— It was considered that the responsibility
for the preparation of sub-regional strategies needs to be clarified
but needed to involve the Regional Planning Body in identifying
and coordinating their preparation. It was also considered important
to utilise the great degree of expertise and resource that exists
within the County Councils. These skills should not be lost.
— Appropriate sub-regions may cross
national or regional boundaries and this needs to be addressed.
— The role of the National Parks and
how their particular issues are dealt with needs to be addressed.
6. LOCAL LEVEL
6.1 The Regional Review is primarily concerned
with the regional level. However, a number of comments were made
with regard to the proposed system of Local Development Frameworks
(LDFs).
— It needs to be made clear as to how
the LDFs will fit into the sub-regional level.
— There is a danger that the preparation
of LDFs with the statement of core policies, action plans and
community involvement could become as time consuming to prepare
as development plans under the current system, with the consequent
problems for the business sector. For example, will action plans
all have to be prepared at once or sequentially and will this
lead to a series of time consuming and resource intensive public
inquiries or hearings.
7. COMMUNITY
INVOLVEMENT
7.1 Some parties expressed concerns that
as currently interpreted the Green Paper may result in a loss
of community rights, in particular with regard to the proposals
to introduce Parliamentary Procedures for major infrastructure
projects; appearances at public inquiries and the decision not
to allow limited third party rights of appeal. The Groups main
concern, however, was that community involvement is important
at all levels of the planning system, and should be an integral
part of the process, it should not create undue delay.
7.2 One particular point is that the Green
Paper gives the impression that if a Statement of Community Involvement
is submitted with planning applications, the proposal will be
agreed irrespective of community views (paragraph 5.55). This
needs to be clarified.
8. DEVELOPMENT
CONTROL
8.1 The following points emerged from the
proceedings:
— Differing views were expressed on
the level of delegation to officers between loss of democratic
accountability and efficiency, however overall this approach was
supported by the Group;
— Pre-application discussion were generally
welcomed but there were concerns about staffing resources and
loss of transparency if fees were to be paid. Removal of the approach
for outline planning permission was raised as a concern;
— Some participants welcomed business
planning zones and asked for them to cover wider industrial and
business sectors; others felt the existing system is adequate;
— There were concerns about reducing
planning permission to three years particularly for larger and
more complex proposals. The proposal to allow for flexible time
limits was felt to be a useful method of overcoming this problem;
— The introduction of tariffs was not
welcomed and seen as an additional burden on companies who already
pay business rates towards local communities. In deed representatives
of business expressed a degree of nervousness about the introduction
of standard tariffs.
9. SUMMARY OF
KEY POINTS
9.1 Following proceedings five key points
emerged:
— Need for national spatial development
framework;
— Need for a streamlining of national
planning policies providing greater clarity which will be key
to delivering plans at regional and local level;
— General acceptance of the role of
statutory planning at the regional level but uncertainty of the
appropriate way forward below this level;
— Need for the quality on decision
making to continue to improve and be consistent but with the recognition
that this requires increased resources and training of planners
and members.
— Need for a defining and workable
process—which provides speedier decision making to meet
the requirements of business while providing for greater community
participation.
April 2002
| 
