Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill.

In the Queen’s speech the Levelling up and Regeneration Bill was announced with the purpose to level up the UK, grow the economy in the places that need it most and regenerate towns and cities and improve the planning system to give communities a louder voice, making sure developments are beautiful, green and accompanied by new infrastructure and affordable housing.

Headline points in relation to planning are:

• A new approach to environmental assessment;
• A locally set, non-negotiable levy to deliver infrastructure that communities need;
• A simplified and standard process for local plans so that they are produced more quickly and are easier for communities to influence;
• A new model of combined authority to provide local leaders with powers to enhance local accountability, join up services and provide transparent decision making to rejuvenate their communities;
• Design codes to let local communities set rules about layout and ‘street votes’ on proposed extensions.

The Bill itself and Explanatory Notes were issued on the 11th May. The following is a brief summary of some of the points of interest:

• For planning the Bill’s objective is to create a planning system which delivers more beautiful and greener homes, with the associated infrastructure and democratic support that neighbourhoods want and deserve;
• A new model of combined county authorities consisting of upper tier authorities only (a county and other county or unitary authority);
• For planning the Bill:
  • Requires all local authorities to have a design code in place covering their entire area acting as a framework for subsequent detailed design codes prepared for specific areas or sites led either by local authorities, neighbourhood plan groups or developers;
  • Sets a framework to replace the use of section 106 agreements and CIL with a new Infrastructure Levy set and raised locally albeit this will need to be set through new regulations set following full consultation. The intention is that local levy rates and spending strategies will still be set locally in order to delivery infrastructure and the charge will be applied at the point of sale of the land at a rate applied above a minimum threshold.
  • Gives local plans more weight by requiring applications to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations strongly indicate otherwise;
  • Requires each local planning authority to prepare one local plan, with the content limited to locally specific matters such as allocating land for development, detailing required infrastructure and setting out principles of good design. General policies on issues applying in most areas (such as general heritage protection) will be set out nationally and contained in a suite of National Development Management Policies, which will have the same weight as plans;
  • introduces ‘Gateway’ checks so that issues are identified earlier during plan preparation, with time periods to be prescribed for different parts of the plan preparation process, enabling delivery of a timebound end-to-end process;
  • proposes the use of more standardised and reusable data;
  • requires local authorities to produce a consolidated proposals map that will form part of the development plan;
  • repeals the ‘duty to cooperate’ contained in existing legislation; but there remains a requirement on specific bodies (prescribed public bodies) to assist in the plan making process, if requested by the plan making authority.
  • introduces powers to prepare supplementary plans for specific sites that will have development plan status;
  • enables groups of authorities to produce Spatial Development Strategies to provide strategic planning policies for cross boundary issues;
  • introduces a new Environmental Outcomes Reports replacing the EU processes of Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment – an outcomes based approach allowing government to set clear and tangible environmental outcomes against which plans and projects are assessed;
  • provides a new, simplified neighbourhood planning tool – neighbourhood priorities statements providing communities with a simpler and more accessible way to set out their key priorities and preferences for their local areas;
  • provides a ‘street votes’ system to allow residents to propose development on their street and hold a vote on whether it should be given planning permission – providing a positive incentive for neighbours to consider the potential for development, especially in areas of higher demand, and support a gentle increase in densities through well-considered, well-designed and locally supported proposals;
  • improves the planning application process with greater powers to regulate information requirements for planning applications (in particular in digital formats) to improve consistency and accessibility;
  • introduces powers to mandate pre-application consultation;
  • improves and simplifies the process for making non-substantial changes to planning permissions;
  • strengthens the protection of the historic environment so that designated heritage assets, such as registered parks and gardens, World Heritage Sites, protected wreck sites, scheduled ancient monuments and registered battlefields, enjoy the same statutory protection in the planning system as listed buildings;

Commentary

Within the supporting information to the Bill, the Government also highlight intentions to alter the NPPF.

To incentivise plan production and ensure new Local Plans are not undermined, the Government will consult on changes to the NPPF to remove the 5 year land supply test where development plans are less than 5 years old so as to curb perceived ‘speculative development’ and ‘planning by appeal’ so long as plans are kept up to date. In instances where a development plan delivers sufficient land and a good level of built in flexibility (i.e. by going above the Standard Methodology or allocating reserve site allocations), this should not create too much of an issue. However, there are still instances where land allocations are stripped back to the bare minimum and perceived/aspirational development in urban areas is not specifically allocated and therefore not tested thoroughly enough through the examination process. In those instances, there is still a real danger that local housing needs will not be met and therefore we consider the Inspectorate should listen carefully to calls for additional allocations in those locations where the bare minimum approach has been advanced.

Interestingly the Bill suggests that the Government intend to pilot Community Land Auctions whereby prospective landowners can put their site forward through an emerging Local Plan process and offer the local planning authority an option on the land at a price set by the landowner, which will go into the mix alongside other planning considerations. Any difference between the set price and the price offered to develop the land will then be retained by the local authority to benefit the local community.

It is also noted that the Government will consult on a set of National Development Management Policies which will sit alongside plans to guide decision making and will hopefully reduce the need for numerous localised and repetitive policies in Local Plans.

The previously proposed zonal system outlined in the previous Planning Bill does not now form part of the new proposals.

Whilst there is continued reference to the 300,000 homes a year target, statements by Michael Gove seems to be stepping away from the Government’s commitment to deliver the target, commenting that ‘People, when it comes to housing development, should be partners. It shouldn’t be a case we impose’. This step away from a clear target is likely to mean less willingness for local authorities to deliver plans that secure the required level of housing.

More local involvement in design coding also risks potential delay in bringing forward developments.

The removal of general policies to national policy statements should help to simplify local plans, allowing them to focus on key development policies relevant for their areas.

The removal of the duty to co-operate is replaced by a request from a plan making authority to assist in the plan making process. Cross boundary issues will remain a challenge in particular the ability to assist in accommodating growth from a neighbouring authority.

There will be new powers to introduce ‘Gateway’ checks so that issues are identified earlier during plan preparation. Time periods are to be prescribed for different parts of the plan preparation process, enabling delivery of a timebound end-to-end process, but how effective will these be and what are the sticks and carrots. Local Plans are currently to be reviewed every five years but take far longer to prepare.

The new requirement for local planning authorities to produce a consolidated policies map of the full development plan for their area is welcomed.

It is questionable how local authorities will have the ability to quickly prepare supplementary plans for areas where policies for specific sites or groups of sites are needed. What is the process and with emphasis on more engagement elsewhere in the Bill it remains to be seen just how quickly any supplementary plans can be prepared, let alone the resources of the LPA to prepared such plans.

In terms of voluntary Spatial Development Strategies where authorities wish to provide strategic planning policies for issues that cut across their areas, this is “watering down” paragraphs 24 – 27 of the current NPPF. Arguably the lack of strategic planning in recent years has exacerbated problems in local plan preparation and examinations. This further diluting the need to address cross boundary issues is not helpful to plan preparation.

This could be addressed by the new route to enable upper tier councils to combine (perhaps regional planning by another name), but it is short on detail in terms of the role and function of such a group. This raises issue of timescale and relationship to the preparation of Local Plans in new prescribed periods.

With regards to heritage, this appears to be applying the levelling up agenda to the historic environment, with the protection upped for registered parks and gardens, World Heritage Sites, protected wreck sites, scheduled ancient monuments and registered battlefields and, importantly, their settings. Interestingly, the protection of setting does not appear to have been upped for Conservation Areas, although provision for this is within the NPPF. There is also provision for the consideration of enhancements to designated assets, in addition to preservation.

Also, there is provision for temporary stop notices to halt unauthorised works to Listed buildings, with the LPA given the power to issue these without going to the court.

Overall, the changes proposed in the Bill itself are likely to begin taking place from 2024 once it has Royal Assent and the associated regulations and changes to national policy are in place.

This article was written by Guy Longley, Sarah Hamilton-Foyn and Gail Stoten. For more information about the contents of this article or any of our services, please contact us.