Pressure on town planners

A radical shake-up of planning was promised by the Conservatives while they were in opposition. It's a pledge they have been keen to fulfil since taking power. Communities secretary Eric Pickles abolished regional spatial strategies , which set the framework for planning under the previous administration, within weeks of the general election. With regional plans gone, responsibility fell on local authorities to make decisions for themselves. But around three-quarters of councils still had no local plans in place to guide planning decisions, despite their introduction by the government six years earlier. The development industry complained that a policy vacuum had been created, a scenario that many in the sector had been predicting for some time . Even work already done on local plans so far is now likely to be revised. Local authorities will be asked to provide their own development targets and documents are expected to be drawn up with a renewed focus on community engagement with plans based onthose created by residents for their own neighbourhoods. Given the historic lack of progress, both councils and developers are concerned about how quickly this will take place. But recently, the government has elaborated on plans which are intended to tackle this issue. Councils which don't adopt a local plan within a given timeframe will be forced to accept development – whether they like it or not. The policy has been framed as a "presumption in favour of sustainable development." Reviewing local plans This has raised obvious concerns among councils. Development is often a contentious issue, and giving up control over where it takes place is unlikely to be a successful scenario politically. But reviewing local plans and building them from the bottom up will be time-consuming and resource-hungry. Against a backdrop of staffing cuts the process could prove to be out of some local authorities' grasp. Royal Town Planning Institute public affairs officer James Butler says: "In the absence of a local plan it has been suggested that all development which fulfils national minimum standards will be permitted. "Local authorities must have the capacity and resources necessary to draw up a local plan if the new planning regime is to genuinely empower communities and reflect their views." A lack of resources is not the only source of concern. Questions have been asked about what exactly sustainable development might mean. Indications from the government suggest it will require judging applications against the need for new development, as well as schemes' environmental credentials. But how it would operate in practice is far from clear. Planning Officers Society president Stephen Tapper says: "It's not known what this definition is. It's quite hard to see how you can determine a planning application based on national indicators without some kind of local input or criteria." Simon Ricketts, head of planning at commercial law firm SJ Berwin, adds: "It's open to the obvious criticism that sustainable development means all things to all people. It's very difficult to apply a test like that to individual situations. We need details as to what is meant by this term. Sustainable development sounds reassuring but as a lawyer I want to see how it is defined." Details surrounding the new planning process, including national planning guidelines, the presumption in favour of sustainable development and a timetable for implementation are due to emerge in a localism and decentralisation bill to be published later this month. But whatever the bill reveals, the process for creating local plans will need to be a lot quicker if councils are to retain control of planning decisions within their boundaries. One option is to reduce the amount of work to do. Under the old system, councils struggled with the sheer amount of documents that were involved in compiling a local development framework. Publishing a concise set of outlines to guide development may be the best course of action. Ian Anderson, head of national planning at real estate consultancy CB Richard Ellis, says: "The plans we get may not be as evidence heavy as the local development framework process. They are likely to be lighter documents, which is a good thing because it can promote flexibility. A slimmed down system will lead to speedier formulation of local plans." Planners have long complained about the amount of documentation which has slowed down the system. But while brevity will be welcomed, the present system is notable for an almost complete absence of guidance. Details about the direction in which planning is headed remain vague. But if all levels of government can keep their guidance concise, a new system may still be built with fewer resources and a pressing timescale. The policy vacuum may still be filled in time to avoid major long-term consequences. Mark Wilding is senior reporter on Property Week